Roberge veut renvoyer le multiculturalisme dans les « limbes de l’histoire »

2025/05/30 Leave a comment

Forgets, of course, s27 of the Charter and the Multiculturalism Act, not to mention that the differences between multiculturalism and interculturalism are relatively small, as both properly understood pertain to civic integration and the CAQ’s more divisive approach has been subject to considerable criticism.

And somewhat ironic for Minister Roberge to state that the parties in the Assemblée nationale opposed Bill 84 given “clientélisme partisan when arguably, so is the CAQ:

« Le multiculturalisme ne s’applique plus sur le territoire québécois, enfin ! […] C’est un modèle qui a toujours été nuisible pour le Québec », a affirmé le ministre mercredi à l’Assemblée nationale.  

Selon lui, dans ce modèle, l’État se donne le devoir de permettre aux nouveaux arrivants de garder leur culture et leur langue d’origine. « C’est ça, le multiculturalisme canadien. On vit les uns aux côtés des autres », a-t-il expliqué.  

Sa nouvelle loi – qui s’inspire de l’interculturalisme – vise à envoyer le signal aux immigrants qu’ils « arrivent dans un État qui a son propre modèle d’intégration » et qu’ils doivent accepter le contrat social du Québec basé sur des valeurs comme la démocratie, la langue française, l’égalité entre les hommes et les femmes ou encore la laïcité.  

« Sans quoi, bien, ce n’est pas une bonne idée de venir ici », indique Jean-François Roberge.  

Mais il reste des éléments à mettre en place afin de clarifier le modèle du ministre. Il promet qu’une « Politique nationale sur l’intégration à la nation québécoise et à la culture commune » sera mise en œuvre avant l’élection de 2026.  

Jean-François Roberge ajoute qu’après l’adoption de cette politique nationale, « tous les ministères, tous les organismes, les municipalités, etc., lorsqu’ils vont subventionner un projet d’un partenaire, vont devoir s’assurer que ce projet est compatible avec les fondements du modèle d’intégration nationale ». 

Le ministre assure que les financements qui ont déjà été octroyés ne seront pas retirés.  

Dans cinq ans, il y aura un rapport pour évaluer le nouveau modèle d’intégration. Les critères seront élaborés dans la Politique nationale.  

Le projet de loi 84 a été adopté mercredi matin au Salon rouge. Le Parti québécois a voté avec le gouvernement. Les solidaires et les libéraux s’y sont opposés. Le ministre s’en est désolé.  

« Je ne sais pas trop, c’est probablement pour des questions de clientélisme partisan. Il devait y avoir quelques membres très très multiculturalistes qui n’ont pas compris que c’était un projet d’ouverture », a-t-il dit.  

Source: Roberge veut renvoyer le multiculturalisme dans les « limbes de l’histoire »

“Multiculturalism no longer applies to Quebec territory, finally! […] It is a model that has always been harmful to Quebec, “said the minister on Wednesday in the National Assembly.

According to him, in this model, the State makes it its duty to allow newcomers to keep their culture and language of origin. “This is Canadian multiculturalism. We live side by side,” he explained.

His new law – which is inspired by interculturalism – aims to send the signal to immigrants that they are “arriving in a state that has its own model of integration” and that they must accept Quebec’s social contract based on values such as democracy, the French language, equality between men and women or secularism.

“Without that, well, it’s not a good idea to come here,” says Jean-François Roberge.

But there are still elements to be put in place in order to clarify the minister’s model. He promises that a “National Policy on Integration into the Quebec Nation and the Common Culture” will be implemented before the 2026 election.

Jean-François Roberge adds that after the adoption of this national policy, “all ministries, agencies, municipalities, etc., when they are going to subsidize a partner’s project, will have to ensure that this project is compatible with the foundations of the national integration model”.

The Minister assures that the funding that has already been granted will not be withdrawn.

In five years, there will be a report to evaluate the new integration model. The criteria will be developed in the National Policy.

Bill 84 was adopted Wednesday morning at the Red Hall. The Parti Québécois voted with the government. The solidarity and liberals opposed it. The minister apologized.

“I’m not sure, it’s probably for questions of partisan clientelism. There must have been some very multicultural members who didn’t understand that it was an opening project,” he said.

Filed under Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Municipalities, rights groups voice concerns about Quebec bill on integrating immigrants 

2025/03/04 2 Comments

As expected, as the practicalities of what would be required are raised:

Quebec municipalities and human rights groups are voicing concerns about proposed legislation that would require newcomers to abide by a set of common values.

They say the new bill on cultural integration could foster anti-immigrant sentiment and impose a heavy administrative burden on communities.

The bill, tabled in January by Quebec’s right-leaning Coalition Avenir Quebec government, would have immigrants adhere to shared values including gender equality, secularism and protection of the French language. The legislation is the latest in a series of bills that aim to reinforce Quebec identity, following the province’s secularism law and its overhaul of the language law.

It’s intended as Quebec’s answer to the Canadian model of multiculturalism that promotes cultural diversity, which the government believes is harmful to social cohesion in Quebec. Immigration Minister Jean-Francois Roberge has said he wants to avoid cultural “ghettos.”

It would also allow the government to make public funding contingent on adherence to a forthcoming integration policy. Roberge has suggested, for example, that festivals could have their funding cut if they don’t promote Quebec’s common culture. That part of the bill has prompted concerns from organizations representing Quebec municipalities, which say it encroaches on municipal autonomy. The Union des municipalites du Quebec is calling on the government to scrap that part of the legislation outright.

Meanwhile, the Federation quebecoise des municipalites wants the funding requirement to be limited to cultural programs and those related to integrating immigrants. They say it would be difficult to review every funding application for adherence to the policy. Pierre Chateauvert, policy director with the federation, told a legislative committee last week that municipalities are already struggling under the weight of laws and policies they have to apply.

“The burden causes you to become paralyzed. You paralyze the system,” he said. “This is what we are currently experiencing.”

The federation says it supports the objectives of the cultural integration bill. But it also wants the government to increase spending on French-language classes for immigrants, many of which were cancelled last fall due to lack of funding. Critics have said those cuts run counter to Quebec’s goals of integration.

Source: Municipalities, rights groups voice concerns about Quebec bill on integrating immigrants

Filed under Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Le modèle caquiste d’intégration est interculturaliste, dit Gérard Bouchard

2025/02/26 Leave a comment

More on Bill 84 and the caution regarding its assimilationist tendencies rather than integration, particularly regarding “common culture, and that integration is a joint responsibility of the host society and newcomers:

Pour le sociologue Gérard Bouchard, un des pères de l’interculturalisme au Québec, il était « grand temps » que le gouvernement consacre son modèle d’intégration des immigrants dans une loi.

Dans un mémoire d’une quinzaine de pages qu’il déposera mardi en lever de rideau de l’étude du projet de loi 84 « sur l’intégration nationale », l’historien et sociologue donne sa bénédiction — non pas sans nuances — à l’avenue empruntée par le ministre de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration, Jean-François Roberge, pour écrire un nouveau « contrat social » avec les personnes immigrantes. S’il le « félicit[e] » pour sa proposition législative soumise il y a un mois à l’Assemblée nationale, il l’incite du même souffle à éviter les dérives « assimilationnistes ».

« Je suis heureux de constater que des notions essentielles de l’interculturalisme ont trouvé place dans l’énoncé du projet de loi 84 », souligne M. Bouchard, qui avait fameusement codirigé les travaux de la commission Bouchard-Taylor en 2007 et 2008.

“Il est grand temps que le Québec se dote d’un modèle de gestion de la diversité qui s’écarte à la fois du multiculturalisme canadien et de tous les modèles assimilationnistes ou à tendance assimilationniste », écrit-il.

Dans son mémoire, Gérard Bouchard, qui avait écrit en 2014 un essai intitulé L’interculturalisme. Un point de vue québécois, se réjouit que le ministre Roberge se soit rattaché dans son projet de loi à une série de principes phares de l’interculturalisme à la sauce Québec — la « culture commune », la « réciprocité », la « promotion du français » et la « nécessité de l’intégration ». Il ne se prive pas, toutefois, d’effectuer une mise en garde. « Il manque [au projet de loi] quelques composantes et celles qui sont mentionnées devront être complétées, sinon reformulées », soutient-il.

Selon lui, il faudra par exemple éviter de définir la « culture commune » du Québec, un concept qui apparaît dans la première phrase du projet de loi, « comme la fusion de toutes les cultures ». « [Cela] relèverait de l’assimilation », peut-on lire.

L’État québécois aura en outre à « prévenir la discrimination et le racisme » et à « financer des cours de francisation et d’initiation à la culture et à la société québécoise » s’il veut bel et bien respecter le principe de réciprocité prévu au projet de loi.

« L’intégration assigne des responsabilités aux immigrants et aux minorités, mais aussi d’importants devoirs à l’État et à la société d’accueil », écrit M. Bouchard, qui recommande d’ailleurs que les entreprises et les organismes privés soient incités à appliquer les pratiques interculturelles dans leur quotidien, comme devront le faire les institutions publiques si le projet de loi est sanctionné comme tel.

« Vision étroite »

À la mi-février, dans une lettre ouverte publiée dans Le Devoir, une trentaine de personnalités publiques, dont les anciennes ministres Louise Beaudoin (Parti québécois), Louise Harel (Parti québécois) et Kathleen Weil (Parti libéral du Québec), avaient dit du projet de loi 84 qu’il était « loin de s’inscrire dans [la] continuité » de l’interculturalisme.

« Avec son approche aux accents assimilationnistes, il s’agit d’une nette rupture par rapport au modèle hérité de la Révolution tranquille. Affirmer les spécificités de l’approche québécoise est essentiel pour offrir une option de remplacement à la fois crédible et juste au multiculturalisme canadien. L’initiative caquiste ne va pas dans ce sens », pouvait-on y lire.

À la veille de son passage en commission parlementaire pour commenter le projet de loi, la Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes (TCRI) tenait le même discours, lundi.

« Il est manifeste que le PL-84 rompt avec l’approche interculturelle de l’intégration, au profit d’une approche assimilationniste », affirme l’organisme dans un document transmis au Devoir et contenant ses « commentaires préliminaires » sur le texte de loi caquiste.

Selon la TCRI, qui fédère plus de 150 organismes œuvrant auprès des personnes immigrantes, la définition de la « culture commune » dans le projet de loi « occulte la diversité qui façonne le Québec d’aujourd’hui ».

« Elle passe sous silence la richesse des nations, cultures et langues présentes sur le territoire, notamment celles des Premières Nations et des Inuits ou de la minorité historique anglophone, qui ne sont mentionnées que dans le préambule du projet de loi. En parlant d’une “culture commune” qui ne reconnaît pas ces contributions, le gouvernement semble vouloir imposer une vision étroite de la culture québécoise », peut-on lire.

En ne s’attachant qu’à la dimension culturelle du processus d’intégration, le projet de loi 84 passe par ailleurs sous silence « d’autres dimensions de l’intégration, comme l’intégration socioéconomique », soulève la TCRI.

Les consultations particulières entourant le projet de loi sur l’intégration nationale s’amorcent mardi à l’Assemblée nationale. En plus de Gérard Bouchard et de la TCRI, plusieurs groupes, comme la Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, le Mouvement laïque québécois et la Ligue des droits et libertés, seront entendus d’ici le 18 mars.

Source: Le modèle caquiste d’intégration est interculturaliste, dit Gérard Bouchard

For sociologist Gérard Bouchard, one of the fathers of interculturalism in Quebec, it was “it was high time” for the government to enshrine its model of integrating immigrants into a law.

In a brief of about fifteen pages that he will deposit on Tuesday in the lifting of the curtain of the study of Bill 84 “on national integration”, the historian and sociologist gives his blessing – not without nuances – to the avenue taken by the Minister of Immigration, Francisation and Integration, Jean-François Roberge, to write a new “social contract” with immigrants. If he “congratulated” him on his legislative proposal submitted a month ago to the National Assembly, he encouraged him in the same breath to avoid “assimilationist” excesses.

“I am pleased to see that essential notions of interculturalism have found a place in the statement of Bill 84,” emphasizes Mr. Bouchard, who had famously co-directed the work of the Bouchard-Taylor commission in 2007 and 2008.

“It is high time that Quebec has a diversity management model that departs from both Canadian multiculturalism and all assimilationist or assimilationist models,” he writes.

In his memoir, Gérard Bouchard, who had written an essay in 2014 entitled L’interculturalisme. A Quebec point of view, is pleased that Minister Roberge has attached himself in his bill to a series of key principles of interculturalism with Quebec sauce – the “common culture”, “reciprocity”, the “promotion of French” and the “need for integration”. He does not hesitate, however, to give a warning. “There are [a few components missing from the bill] and those mentioned will have to be completed, if not reformulated,” he says.

According to him, it will be necessary, for example, to avoid defining the “common culture” of Quebec, a concept that appears in the first sentence of the bill, “as the fusion of all cultures”. “[This] would be a matter of assimilation,” we can read.

The Quebec State will also have to “prevent discrimination and racism” and “finance francization and initiation courses into Quebec culture and society” if it does want to respect the principle of reciprocity provided for in the bill.

“Integration assigns responsibilities to immigrants and minorities, but also important duties to the State and the host society,” writes Mr. Bouchard, who also recommends that companies and private organizations be encouraged to apply intercultural practices in their daily lives, as public institutions will have to do if the bill is sanctioned as such.

“Close vision”

In mid-February, in an open letter published in Le Devoir, about 30 public figures, including former ministers Louise Beaudoin (Parti québécois), Louise Harel (Parti québécois) and Kathleen Weil (Parti libéral du Québec), had said of Bill 84 that it was “far from being part of [the] continuity” of interculturalism.

“With its approach with assimilationist accents, it is a clear break with the model inherited from the Quiet Revolution. Affirming the specifics of the Quebec approach is essential to offer a replacement option that is both credible and fair to Canadian multiculturalism. The Caquist initiative does not go in this direction, “we could read.

On the eve of its passage in the parliamentary committee to comment on the bill, the Table of Concertation of Organizations Serving Refugees and Immigrants (TCRI) gave the same speech on Monday.

“It is clear that the PL-84 breaks with the intercultural approach to integration, in favor of an assimilationist approach,” says the organization in a document sent to Le Devoir and containing its “preliminary comments” on the Caquiste law.

According to the TCRI, which brings together more than 150 organizations working with immigrants, the definition of “common culture” in the bill “hides the diversity that shapes today’s Quebec”.

“It ignores the richness of the nations, cultures and languages present on the territory, especially those of the First Nations and the Inuit or the historical English-speaking minority, which are only mentioned in the preamble of the bill. Speaking of a “common culture” that does not recognize these contributions, the government seems to want to impose a narrow vision of Quebec culture,” we can read.

By focusing only on the cultural dimension of the integration process, Bill 84 also ignores “other dimensions of integration, such as socio-economic integration,” raises the TCRI.

Special consultations on the draft law on national integration begin on Tuesday in the National Assembly. In addition to Gérard Bouchard and the TCRI, several groups, such as the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, the Mouvement laïque québécois and the Ligue des droits et libertés, will be heard by March 18.

Filed under Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Geoff Russ: Quebec’s cultural integration bill is a model for the rest of Canada

2025/02/13 Leave a comment

Contrary view to much of the commentary on Bill 24. Russ is correct in stating that multiculturalism was always about integration, allowing space for cultures and religions, with reasonable accommodations where warranted, and within limits:

…Nothing in Bill 84 suggests an intention to erase diverse identities or arbitrarily impose a dominant monoculture upon Quebec’s population. What it does attempt is to make a shared national identity possible in this era of digital globalization and mass immigration, both of which challenge our long-held assumptions about integration.

Civic identity is an issue that grows more pressing by the year. By the 2026 census, about one-third of Canadians will likely have been born abroad. They will more than likely be dual citizens and people who remain connected to their mother countries like never before, due to the spread of social media platforms such as X and TikTok, as well as streaming services.

The unspoken agreement to forget the conflicts and prejudices of the old world, which once helped newcomers integrate into Canadian society, is under threat of extinction. Since October 7, 2023, and even before that, we have seen the consequences play out in the streets of our cities and in our foreign policy.

Anti-Israel mobs have roamed freely, causing civil disorder and committing violence against the Jewish community. Khalistani protests outside Hindu temples have turned violent, and the separatist group’s presence in Canada has become so strong that it has damaged diplomatic relations with India. This is a new phenomenon: older generations of immigrants, such as Albanians, Croats and Serbs, did not bring the Yugoslav wars to Canada.

It’s also a global phenomenon, as synagogues are being outright burned down in Australia. With United States President Donald Trump’s recent pledge to take over the Gaza Strip and “resettle” the Palestinians elsewhere, do not expect this wave to end anytime soon.

However, finding Trump’s plan for Gaza unacceptable does not legitimize further violence and intimidation in Canada. No matter what happens thousands of miles away, it never gives anyone licence to break Canadian law.

Welcoming different cultures into this country is not the problem. We all have friends whose parents or grandparents were born abroad and who have retained their ancestral cultures and religions.

The problem today is the inability of many of our governing politicians to articulate the need for integration — and their fear of even broaching the idea. Multiculturalism was not intended to enable the balkanization of our communities into ethnic blocs that command more loyalty than that owed to pan-Canadian society.

Canadian multiculturalism was meant to be a process by which cultural traditions of all kinds could be retained alongside a shared Canadian identity, but that identity has been deeply eroded in 2025.

Even the current surge of patriotism felt across the country, triggered by Trump’s threat to wage economic warfare on us, should be treated as a dead-cat bounce. The moment external pressure from the White House begins to subside, Canada will revert to its previous state — an ever-fragmenting society coming apart at the seams. It cannot truly be recovered without a push for integration.

Many people shudder at the word “assimilation,” both in Quebec and the rest of Canada. There is no pride to be had in the forced assimilation of Indigenous peoples over the past few centuries, nor in the softer attempts to erase Francophone culture. Still, despite the darker parts of Canadian history, governments today have a responsibility to build unity and prevent cultural division and destruction. Bill 84 is Quebec’s most recent attempt to see to this duty.

For too long, it has been assumed that cultural integration was inevitable and would happen by itself. However, that’s a misguided assumption: when communities remain separated and many of their most politically active members mobilize for foreign causes, Canada will fracture.

Government action in this delicate area cannot simply consist of words anymore, and Bill 84 recognizes that.

Far from scorn, Quebec’s proposed model for integration is something to emulate on both sides of the political spectrum. On the left, integration should be recognized as the only way to preserve a peaceful, diverse society that will not collapse under the weight of its own imported tensions. For those of us on the right, strengthening national unity is a pillar of conservatism.

The late English philosopher Roger Scruton wrote that conservatism is the simple preservation of what a society knows and loves. What Canadians and Quebecers recognize and cherish in their communities is part of what continues to attract newcomers, and this should be actively protected.

Integration has never meant abandoning one’s culture. When realized, it is the creation of shared civic and cultural bonds that allow all groups to co-exist peacefully. While those bonds steadily erode in English Canada due to its generally negligent, hands-off approach, Quebec is taking action to stop the same from happening.

Many may be asking why Quebec’s government is doing this. The real question is: why isn’t the rest of Canada doing the same?

Source: Geoff Russ: Quebec’s cultural integration bill is a model for the rest of Canada

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Le Devoir editorial: Gare aux contradictions 

2025/02/04 Leave a comment

More on Quebec’s CAQ identity and integration policies:

Nouvelle année, nouvelle offensive nationaliste caquiste. François Legault avait prévenu qu’il mettrait le cap sur le dossier de l’identité. Ce fut chose faite dès les premiers jours de la rentrée parlementaire à Québec, avec le dépôt de son projet de loi-cadre enchâssant le modèle choisi de l’interculturalisme comme meilleur rempart pour assurer la vitalité et la pérennité de la langue française et de la culture francophone.

Le projet de « loi sur l’intégration nationale » énonce les grands principes auxquels adhère la société québécoise — être démocratique, laïque, guidée par sa Charte des droits et libertés et l’égalité hommes-femmes, et évoluer dans une langue commune, le français. L’affirmation nationale de consensus établis au Québec, qui guideront au travers de l’appareil de l’État québécois l’intégration de nouveaux arrivants dans un esprit de mixité.

Sur papier, la proposition caquiste s’en tient aux terrains d’entente et aux doctrines orthodoxes du modèle d’intégration québécois à une société et à une culture communes. L’adhésion et la participation de tous, la contribution de chacun.

Une nouvelle proposition législative qui se veut consensuelle, afin d’apporter une nouvelle pierre à l’édification d’un cadre constitutionnel proprement québécois. De grands pans de la mise en œuvre de cette loi-cadre restent toutefois à définir.

Une politique nationale viendra régir son champ d’application dans l’appareil gouvernemental et parapublic 18 mois après son adoption. Un règlement balisera par ailleurs les nouvelles règles de financement d’activités et d’organismes soutenus par l’État, qui devront à l’avenir respecter ce nouveau cadre d’intégration, dans les deux années suivant sa promulgation.

Le ministre de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration, Jean-François Roberge, a laissé entendre, à la suite du dépôt de son projet de loi jeudi, que son gouvernement pourrait ainsi forcer un pressant ménage dans l’attribution de places dans les garderies subventionnées, où le religieux s’est immiscé. Il a en outre laissé planer la possibilité que le financement public versé aux écoles à vocation religieuse puisse être revu à son tour. Un revirement pour le gouvernement, qui choisirait alors judicieusement la voie de la cohérence.

Bien qu’il prépare sa loi depuis 18 mois, le ministre Roberge s’est montré tout aussi vague quant aux nouvelles balises qui encadreront le financement étatique d’événements communautaires ou d’activités culturelles. Au-delà de la microgestion du moindre rassemblement, l’adoption d’une culture commune passe par la découverte d’artistes et d’œuvres du Québec. Et pas seulement forcée.

Pour un gouvernement qui souhaite rassembler tous les Québécois autour d’une culture commune,dont les acteurs crient leur détresse, la fin de la gratuité universelle dans les musées le premier dimanche du mois est difficile à expliquer.

Tout comme la fermeture de classes de francisation. Le ministre et son gouvernement ont beau nier les « coupures budgétaires » en prétextant plutôt « le respect budgétaire », le résultat est le même. Les immigrants, de qui il exige une maîtrise du français pour en assurer la vitalité devant la menace, sont privés des cours espérés.

Prétendre que la demande rejoindra l’offre en francisation puisque le gouvernement resserre l’accueil d’immigrants temporaires relève de l’illusion. L’arriéré de nouveaux arrivants désireux d’apprendre la langue commune du Québec (bien qu’il découle d’abord de l’accueil pléthorique fédéral) ne disparaîtra pas pour autant. Et ceux qui fuient la guerre, les dérèglements climatiques ou la dureté du président américain, Donald Trump, ne seront pas moins nombreux.

Les contradictions du gouvernement de François Legault ne s’expliqueront pas aussi facilement.

D’autant que son propre projet de loi-cadre prône une nécessaire approche de réciprocité des responsabilités partagées entre l’État québécois et les nouveaux arrivants.

Il est attendu que ces derniers apprennent le français et participent ainsi à la vitalité de la culture québécoise. Encore faut-il leur donner les moyens de respecter ce contrat social qui leur est présenté.

Le gouvernement s’engage, noir sur blanc, à prendre des mesures pour contribuer à leur intégration, « par exemple en créant et en maintenant les conditions favorisant l’apprentissage du français ». De même qu’à « facilite[r] l’accès aux œuvres et aux contenus culturels ». Les échos sur le terrain — qu’ils découlent d’une rigueur ou d’une responsabilité budgétaires — laissent croire que le gouvernement n’y met pas tout à fait les ressources prescrites.

François Legault mise sur la carte de l’identité pour faire oublier les défis auxquels il fait face. Au-delà des intentions, c’est sur les résultats concrets qu’il sera jugé.

Source: Gare aux contradictions

New year, new Caquist nationalist offensive. François Legault had warned that he would set course for the identity file. This was done in the first days of the parliamentary return to school in Quebec City, with the tabled of its draft framework law enshrining the chosen model of interculturalism as the best bulwark to ensure the vitality and sustainability of the French language and Francophone culture.

The draft “law on national integration” sets out the main principles to which Quebec society adheres – to be democratic, secular, guided by its Charter of Rights and Freedoms and gender equality, and to evolve in a common language, French. The national affirmation of consensus established in Quebec, which will guide through the apparatus of the Quebec State the integration of newcomers in a spirit of diversity.

On paper, the Caquist proposal sticks to the common grounds and orthodox doctrines of the Quebec model of integration into a common society and culture. The support and participation of all, the contribution of each.

A new legislative proposal that aims to be consensual, in order to bring a new stone to the construction of a properly Quebec constitutional framework. However, major parts of the implementation of this framework law remain to be defined.

A national policy will govern its scope in the government and parapublic apparatus 18 months after its adoption. A regulation will also set out the new rules for financing activities and organizations supported by the State, which will have to comply with this new integration framework in the future, within two years of its promulgation.

The Minister of Immigration, Francisation and Integration, Jean-François Roberge, suggested, following the tabling of his bill on Thursday, that his government could thus force a pressing budget in the allocation of places in subsidized daycare centers, where the religious have interfered. He also left it possible that public funding for religious schools could be reviewed in turn. A turnaround for the government, which would then wisely choose the path of coherence.

Although he has been preparing his law for 18 months, Minister Roberge has been equally vague about the new beacons that will govern the state financing of community events or cultural activities. Beyond the micromanagement of the slightest gathering, the adoption of a common culture requires the discovery of Quebec artists and works. And not just forced.

For a government that wants to bring together all Quebecers around a common culture, whose actors shout their distress, the end of universal gratuity in museums on the first Sunday of the month is difficult to explain.

Just like the closure of francization classes. The minister and his government may deny “budget cuts” on the pretext of “budgetary respect”, the result is the same. Immigrants, from whom he requires a mastery of French to ensure their vitality in the face of the threat, are deprived of the hoped-for courses.

To claim that demand will join the supply in francization since the government is tightening the reception of temporary immigrants is a matter of illusion. The backlog of newcomers wishing to learn the common language of Quebec (although it first stems from the federal full reception) will not disappear. And those fleeing war, climate change or the harshness of American President Donald Trump will not be less numerous.

The contradictions of François Legault’s government will not be so easily explained.

Especially since his own draft framework law advocates a necessary approach to reciprocity of shared responsibilities between the Quebec State and newcomers.

They are expected to learn French and thus participate in the vitality of Quebec culture. They must still be given the means to respect this social contract that is presented to them.

The government undertakes, in black and white, to take measures to contribute to their integration, “for example by creating and maintaining conditions conducive to learning French”. As well as “facilitates access to cultural works and content”. The echoes on the ground — whether they stem from budgetary rigour or responsibility — suggest that the government is not quite putting the prescribed resources into it.

François Legault relies on the identity card to make people forget the challenges he faces. Beyond the intentions, it is on the concrete results that he will be judged.

Filed under Integration, Interculturalisme Tagged with , , ,

FIRST READING: Inside Quebec’s new plan to kill multiculturalism

2025/02/03 Leave a comment

NP on Bill 84. Lots of nuance given different understandings of multiculturalism which, in the Canadian context, has always been about integration, not separation, with accommodation aimed at integration, not separation. Implementation and behaviours of course are not perfect:

In what may yet prove to be a model for the rest of the country, Quebec is rolling out a comprehensive plan to kill Canadian multiculturalism in favour of “interculturalism.”

Bill 84, An Act respecting national integration, which was tabled Thursday, lays out an “integration model” under which immigrants to Quebec are expected to both learn French and adhere to a “common culture.”

“For the first time in our history, we’re going to define who we are and how we want to evolve as a nation,” said Jean-François Roberge, Quebec’s immigration minister, in a French-language web video promoting the bill that was posted on Monday.

“This model will let us build a society where the Francophone majority invites all Quebecers to adhere and contribute to the common culture of our nation,” he said.

In an English-language defence of the bill delivered at a press availability on Tuesday, Roberge said people coming to Quebec “must accept” its democratic values, such as the equality of men and women. “We don’t want ghettoes, we want one society.”

In an English-language defence of the bill delivered at a press availability on Tuesday, Roberge said people coming to Quebec “must accept” its democratic values, such as the equality of men and women. “We don’t want ghettoes, we want one society.”

The bill’s text states that Quebecers are “expected to … collaborate in the welcoming of immigrants and foster their integration into the Québec nation.”

Conversely, immigrants are expected to “participate fully, in French, in Québec society” and “participate in the vitality of Québec culture by enriching it.”

Quebec’s forays into cultural protection are often conspicuously out of step with the rest of Canada. That’s most obviously been the case when it comes to another piece of CAQ legislation, Bill 21. Passed in 2019, it forbids Quebec government employees — including nurses and teachers — from wearing religious garb at work such as hijabs, kippas, dastaars or Catholic pendants.

Bill 21 inspired widespread condemnation from across English Canada, including from the Conservatives.

But on the issue of integrating immigrants, nationwide polls show that Canadians are increasingly supportive of a system in which newcomers must adhere to certain “shared values.”

A Leger poll from November 2023 found 55 per cent of respondents agreeing with the notion that the Canadian government should be “encouraging newcomers to embrace broad mainstream values and traditions and leave behind elements of their cultural identity that may be incompatible with that.”

That same poll also found that a majority of non-white respondents did not automatically agree with the nostrum “diversity is our strength.”

Instead, 56 per cent agreed with the notion that “some elements of diversity can provide strength, but some elements of diversity can cause problems / conflict” — slightly higher than the share of Caucasian respondents (55 per cent) who said the same thing.

Source: FIRST READING: Inside Quebec’s new plan to kill multiculturalism

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

David | Le creuset québécois

2025/02/03 Leave a comment

Some Quebec reaction to the CAQ integration and interculturalisme proposals and the reference to a Quebec melting pot along with Premier Legault:

Tant pis pour le premier ministre Legault, qui a manqué « un moment solennel dans l’histoire du Québec », au dire du ministre de l’Immigration, de la Langue française et de l’Intégration, Jean-François Roberge.

Plutôt que d’assister à la présentation du projet de loi sur le nouveau « modèle d’intégration nationale », que M. Roberge estime être LE projet de la session parlementaire, M. Legault a préféré se rendre sur la Côte-Nord, où il a senti le besoin de parler de Donald Trump. Allez donc savoir pourquoi !

Depuis que la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) est au pouvoir, on a perdu le compte de ces moments solennels, voire historiques, où se joue le sort de la nation. Le premier ministre s’est peut-être dit qu’il avait le luxe de sauter un tour.

De mémoire, c’est néanmoins la première fois qu’un projet de loi évoque le « creuset » québécois, ce qui est la traduction française du légendaire melting-pot américain. Cela traduit une volonté d’intégration plus poussée que l’« interculturalisme » recommandé par le rapport Bouchard-Taylor.

Il est assurément souhaitable que l’ensemble de la société québécoise conjugue ses efforts pour favoriser une meilleure intégration des nouveaux arrivants et qu’une loi vienne les encadrer. Les Québécois n’en demeurent pas moins les premiers responsables de la pérennité d’une nation de langue et de culture françaises. Le désir d’intégration des immigrants sera fonction de notre propre détermination.

Il faudra attendre au moins 18 mois avant de voir la « politique nationale d’intégration » qui doit rendre le nouveau modèle opérationnel. À cette date, le Québec sera à la veille de la campagne électorale, de sorte que cette politique pourrait bien ne jamais être appliquée. Tout comme le projet de constitution québécoise auquel s’affaire Simon Jolin-Barrette, elle semble plutôt destinée à alimenter le discours de la CAQ.

***

L’idée d’un « contrat social » entre l’État et les immigrants n’est pas nouvelle. On l’avait évoqué lors des États généraux du Canada français à la fin des années 1960. Elle avait été reprise 25 ans plus tard par la ministre de l’Immigration dans le gouvernement Bourassa, Monique Gagnon-Tremblay, qui y voyait déjà le « garant d’une intégration réussie ».

En 1994, on avait ridiculisé le « contrat moral » proposé par l’Action démocratique du Québec, par lequel les immigrants devraient s’engager à « vivre et à travailler en français », mais il a néanmoins inspiré la « Déclaration d’adhésion aux valeurs communes » introduite par la libérale Yolande James en 2008 et le « test des valeurs » imposé par la CAQ en 2019.

La nouveauté du modèle proposé par M. Roberge consiste à étendre le contrat aux institutions et aux organismes qui relèvent du gouvernement (municipalités, universités, écoles, hôpitaux…), de même que les bénéficiaires de subventions, dont le financement pourrait être coupé s’ils ne contribuent pas à l’intégration de façon satisfaisante.

C’est là que les choses risquent de se compliquer. Pour mettre en valeur la diversité tout en faisant la promotion d’un tronc culturel commun, faudrait-il inclure des artistes québécois dans la programmation des Nuits d’Afrique ou mettre la poutine au menu des festivals gastronomiques qui célèbrent les cuisines étrangères ?

Comment la conformité aux objectifs d’intégration sera-t-elle évaluée ? Les fonctionnaires ont la fâcheuse habitude d’appliquer avec zèle les directives qu’on leur donne. Certains ont conservé un très mauvais souvenir de la défunte Commission de protection de la langue française. Faudra-t-il créer une « police des festivals », comme l’a demandé la co-porte-parole de Québec solidaire, Ruba Ghazal ?

***

Rouvrir les classes de francisation qui ont été fermées au cours des derniers mois serait certainement un bon début, mais M. Roberge fait partie de ceux qui pensent que les compressions budgétaires n’existent que dans l’esprit de gens qui ne comprennent rien à la comptabilité. À en croire le gouvernement, plus on investit en éducation ou en santé, plus il faut supprimer des postes.

Comme chacun sait, le Québec est le seul endroit en Amérique du Nord où le racisme systémique n’existe pas, même si les immigrants sont quotidiennement victimes de comportements racistes, que ce soit au travail, dans la rue, quand ils cherchent un logement, postulent un emploi ou ont affaire à la police.

Ils seraient peut-être plus enclins à s’intégrer si on admettait que tout cela ne peut pas être simplement le fait d’individus qui n’ont pas encore compris ou accepté les règles du vivre-ensemble dans une société ouverte et que des mesures vigoureuses étaient prises.

Il y a aussi l’épineuse question des écoles religieuses privées subventionnées, qu’elles soient juives, musulmanes ou autres, qui ne contribuent manifestement pas à l’intégration en endoctrinant systématiquement leurs élèves. M. Roberge reconnaît que cela devrait « faire partie de la réflexion », mais M. Legault a catégoriquement exclu de leur couper les vivres.

Finalement, il aurait peut-être dû être à Québec pour entendre les explications de son ministre.

Source: Chronique | Le creuset québécois

Too bad for Prime Minister Legault, who missed “a solemn moment in the history of Quebec,” according to the Minister of Immigration, the French Language and Integration, Jean-François Roberge.

Rather than attending the presentation of the bill on the new “national integration model”, that Mr. Roberge considers to be THE project of the parliamentary session, Mr. Legault preferred to go to the North Shore, where he felt the need to talk about Donald Trump. Go find out why!

Since the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) has been in power, we have lost count of these solemn, even historical, moments when the fate of the nation is at stake. The Prime Minister may have thought he had the luxury of jumping a round.

From memory, it is nevertheless the first time that a bill evokes the Quebec “crucible”, which is the French translation of the legendary American melting pot. This reflects a desire for integration more advanced than the “interculturalism” recommended by the Bouchard-Taylor report.

It is certainly desirable that the whole of Quebec society joins its efforts to promote a better integration of newcomers and that a law will regulate them. Quebecers nevertheless remain the first responsible for the sustainability of a nation of French language and culture. The desire for integration of immigrants will depend on our own determination.

It will take at least 18 months before we see the “national integration policy” that should make the new model operational. On that date, Quebec will be on the eve of the election campaign, so this policy may never be applied. Just like the draft Quebec constitution in which Simon Jolin-Barrette is busy, it seems rather intended to feed the CAQ’s discourse.

The idea of a “social contract” between the state and immigrants is not new. It was mentioned during the States General of French Canada in the late 1960s. It was taken over 25 years later by the Minister of Immigration in the Bourassa government, Monique Gagnon-Tremblay, who already saw it as the “guarantor of successful integration”.

In 1994, the “moral contract” proposed by the Action démocratique du Québec was ridiculed, by which immigrants should commit to “living and working in French”, but it nevertheless inspired the “Declaration of adherence to common values” introduced by the liberal Yolande James in 2008 and the “test of values” imposed by the CAQ in 2019.

The novelty of the model proposed by Mr. Roberge consists of extending the contract to institutions and organizations that fall under the responsibility of the government (municipalities, universities, schools, hospitals, etc.), as well as to beneficiaries of subsidies, whose funding could be cut if they do not contribute to integration satisfactorily.

This is where things may get complicated. To highlight diversity while promoting a common cultural core, should we include Quebec artists in the programming of the Nuits d’Afrique or put poutine on the menu of gastronomic festivals that celebrate foreign cuisines?

How will compliance with the integration objectives be assessed? Officials have the unfortunate habit of zealously applying the directives given to them. Some have kept a very bad memory of the defunct Commission de protection de la langue française. Will it be necessary to create a “festival police”, as requested by the co-spokeswoman of Québec solidaire, Ruba Ghazal?

Reopening the francization classes that have been closed in recent months would certainly be a good start, but Mr. Roberge is one of those who think that budget cuts only exist in the minds of people who don’t understand anything about accounting. According to the government, the more we invest in education or health, the more jobs need to be cut.

As everyone knows, Quebec is the only place in North America where systemic racism does not exist, even if immigrants are victims of racist behavior on a daily basis, whether at work, on the street, when they are looking for housing, applying for a job or dealing with the police.

They might be more inclined to integrate if it were admitted that all this cannot simply be the result of individuals who have not yet understood or accepted the rules of living together in an open society and that vigorous measures were taken.

There is also the thorny question of subsidized private religious schools, whether Jewish, Muslim or otherwise, which clearly do not contribute to integration by systematically indoctrinating their students. Mr. Roberge acknowledges that this should “be part of the reflection”, but Mr. Legault categorically ruled out cutting off their food.

Finally, he might have had to be in Quebec City to hear his minister’s explanations.

Filed under Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Quebec’s CAQ government tables ‘integration’ bill for new immigrants

2025/02/01 Leave a comment

Here we go…:

Immigration Minister Jean-François Roberge tabled Thursday a bill meant to distinguish the province’s approach to newcomers from what Roberge called Canada’s “vicious” multiculturalism.

Bill 84, laid out in a 12-page document called “An Act respecting national integration,” includes a list of expectations for the Quebec state, Quebecers and new immigrants to Quebec. It aims to establish the province’s integration model, which is inspired by the concept of interculturalism.

Roberge said Tuesday that the difference between interculturalism and multiculturalism is that the former creates “relations between people,” whereas the latter “doesn’t define a common culture.”

The bill calls on new immigrants to learn French upon arrival in Quebec and to respect a set of values, including those enumerated in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“This law reiterates that Quebec is a nation in its own right with a strong culture,” Roberge told journalists Thursday. “As a nationalist government, we are therefore taking our responsibilities and making a strong gesture to protect our social cohesion, our way of living together, our identity.”

The document defines Quebec culture as “characterized in particular by the French language, the civil law tradition, specific institutions, distinct social values, a specific history, and the importance given to equality between women and men, to the laicity of the State and to the protection of Quebec’s only official and common language.”

The bill commits Quebec to “foster the learning of French as well as the learning of democratic values,” but does not specifically say the province has to provide French courses.

The bill also says the government would ensure organizations helping immigrants follow the bill and could remove funding to those that do not, although Roberge admitted to journalists Thursday there were not yet clear guidelines on how the province would enforce the bill.

In recent months, the province has cancelled hundreds of French courses due to funding issues. After Roberge announced on Tuesday that he would be tabling the bill this week, opposition parties were reluctant to show support given the province’s struggle to meet francization demands.

Veronica Islas, who runs Carrefour de ressources en intercultuel, an organization helping immigrants in Montreal, said the proposed legislation’s lack of clarity on how it would be implemented and why it was being created left her fearing it would have the adverse effect of alienating or “othering” people.

“Words have meaning and there’s a difference between integration and inclusion,” Islas said.

Roberge also defended himself on Tuesday from the idea that he was once again using nationalism to win back voting intentions.

“During our first mandate, we took the step of adopting Bill 21 when we were leading in the polls — and by a long, long shot — [and] we did the same thing with Bill 96,” he said. “We are taking strong, identity-based actions to ensure the Quebec model, regardless of the polls.”

The bill also says Quebec must facilitate “access to Quebec works, cultural content and heritage property, [enhance] them and fosters their discoverability.”

The government recently announced a series of financial cutbacks at several cultural institutions, including the end of free entry to a number of museums on Sundays. A group called the Common Front for the Arts of Quebec has held protests amid calls for increased funding of arts and culture activities in the province. It has emphasized the importance of Quebec’s national identity.

Source: Quebec’s CAQ government tables ‘integration’ bill for new immigrants

Filed under Integration, Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,