Why Quebec’s election turned into a slugfest over immigration

2022/10/04 Leave a comment

Not a bad overview. Election will likely demonstrate the weakness of first-past-the-post in situations of one dominant party and a number of smaller parties:

David Heurtel walked into the room and immediately spotted the angry man at the back.

It was November 2017 and the Quebec Liberal Party’s immigration minister was hosting a town-hall meeting in Sainte-Claire, a town across the river from Quebec City, in a rural region that is considered the province’s nationalist conservative heartland.

The man he spotted was typical of the local population. Older, white and francophone.

And he emanated a lingering, pent-up frustration.

“I said, ‘Oh, that guy is going to give me trouble at some point,’” Heurtel, a lawyer, recalled in an interview.

And he did.

Toward the end of the meeting, the man raised his hand. Heurtel braced himself and invited the man to air his grievance.

But it was not what he was expecting.

Not a complaint about Muslims or hijabs. Not about clashes of cultures and Quebec values. Not about the thousands of asylum seekers who had begun streaming across the border the previous summer. Not about the French-language abilities of newcomers to the province.

Not about any of these sinkhole political debates that appear with troubling regularity in Quebec, sucking in elected officials, media commentators, activists and community associations.

“He says, ‘For Christ’s sake, I need workers! I don’t give a damn if they’re red, purple, yellow or green. I need workers right now and I’ll teach them French myself!’” Heurtel recounted, speaking in Quebec’s working-class joual to fully express the colourful language.

Five years later, after the economic ravages of the pandemic and the continued aging of the population, the “Workers Wanted” refrain has only grown in desperation. In this sense, Quebec is no different from Ontario, Alberta or any other Canadian province or territory.

Which is why the combination of political punches launched this week by candidates, in the final days of an otherwise sleepy Quebec election campaign that will be decided next Monday, was so difficult to comprehend.

The sequence opened with an innocuous jab, the likes of which have sadly become a routine occurrence in Quebec politics.

A candidate for the sovereigntist Parti Québécois, Lyne Jubinville, was exposed by Montreal’s Le Devoir and forced to apologize for anti-Islam rants about “hijabs” that “increasingly invade our public space,” and about mosques and Muslim calls to prayer taking the place of emptied Catholic churches and silenced church bells.

It was followed by a hook from Jean Boulet, Heurtel’s successor as immigration minister, who belongs to the governing centre-right party Coalition Avenir Québec. In a clip from a local election debate held a week prior, he appeared to write off newcomers to Quebec as good-for-nothings.

“Eighty per cent of immigrants go to Montreal, don’t work, don’t speak French or don’t accept the values of Quebec society,” he said in the debate.

Boulet apologized for the tone of his comments, which he said were not an expression of his beliefs, but he was denounced by Quebec Premier François Legault, who said the minister had talked himself out of his ministerial post if he is re-elected on Oct. 3.

But then Legault himself delivered the roundhouse shot that left so many in this province seeing stars.

He delivered a speech to the Metropolitan Montreal Chamber of Commerce — an audience of employers and big-business owners — and spoke about this summer’s census report, which showed declines in the number of people who speak French across the country.

Legault said that if his party is re-elected, it would put in place tougher French-language requirements for immigrants and try to ensure that more of them settle in outlying regions of Quebec.

“But until we have stopped the decline of French,” he continued, “I think that for the Quebec nation that wants to protect its language it would be a little suicidal to go and increase immigration levels.”

“Suicidal.” The comments set off waves of anxiety among Quebec immigrants and second-generation Quebecers.

A journalist with the TVA network, Chu Anh Pham, wrote on Twitter about her parents, who fled the Vietnam War and settled in Montreal.

“Since they arrived here, they have always worked. We all learned French in Montreal and have never relied on social assistance. I have a tonne of other examples.”

Mamadou Doukara replied to her message and expanded on his experience in a radio interview. He explained how he spent his father’s inheritance to get from Mali to Quebec on a student visa, but immediately set about looking for work to reduce the financial burden on his family.

“Every provincial election was a source of stress,” noted Bao Long Hoang, another immigrant to Quebec, who wrote that he now lives in Ottawa. “So much stupidity voiced without shame.”

Dr. Joseph Dahine, an intensive care specialist who immigrated with his family to Montreal when he was a young child, said he likely never would have been able to afford his studies in medicine if his family had parents had immigrated to the United States.

He said Quebec should be celebrating what it has to offer — affordable daycare, publicly funded health care, low tuition fees and other attractions — rather than eternally fretting about cultural differences and religious backgrounds and mastery of the French language.

“Language is not the menace. It’s not the threat,” Dahine said in an interview. “It’s actually the reason why people come here. It’s usually their second language and they feel they could get by. They see an opportunity.”

Dahine likened the immigration process to joining a team and wanting to fit in. “You want to see people having fun, celebrating their culture. You want to look at these people and be inspired and say, ‘I want to be just like them,’” he said.

“As long as it’s a speech about the fear of losing something, it’s not an inspiring speech. Who wants to fit in with a group that is always talking about the fear of losing?”

Apart from the message such comments send to immigrants and homegrown Quebecers alike, Legault’s dark, defeatist tone is at odds with the great efforts and investments that the CAQ has made as a government, said Catherine Xhardez, an assistant professor of political science who specializes in immigration at Université de Montréal.

“They have this discourse that is a little alarmist and make these dark declarations,” she said. “In fact, the numbers are good and with (the Coalition Avenir Québec’s) policies they have invested a lot of money in francization (teaching French to newcomers) and integration.”

She also noted that the number of permits for temporary foreign workers has “exploded” under the CAQ. Recent statistics show the number of permits more than doubled from 13,030 in 2017 — the year before Legault’s party came to power — to 30,340 in 2021, the CBC reported.

“That’s what I find a little paradoxical with these dark speeches,” Xhardez said. “Do they think it’s useful to make comments that are much harsher than their policies? Because their policies have not been hard on immigration.”

It’s not just the CAQ, though. The immigration platforms of three of the five major parties competing in Monday’s elections hit similar notes.

The Parti Québécois, a diminished political force in recent years, proposes that knowledge of the French language, Quebec culture and the obligations and expectations that accompany citizenship be mandatory before immigrants set foot in the province.

And the newly significant Quebec Conservative Party, led by former radio shock jock Éric Duhaime, has suggested that new immigrants be screened to ensure they are “civilizationally compatible” with Quebec’s values, though Duhaime has taken steps in the campaign to distance himself from the term.

The other two parties, the Liberals and Québec Solidaire, have pro-immigration platforms. The left-wing QS promises to make it easier to have foreign education and employment credentials recognized; the Liberals suggest that priority be given to immigrants to immediately fill the gaps in health care, education and other in-demand sectors of the economy.

“Immigration is a solution. It’s not a problem,” said Heurtel, who said he is no longer an active member of any party. “Companies want them. Society wants them in general and the fact is that they’re a positive, not a negative.”

But for now, that ugly “Make Quebec Great Again” discourse persists, if only to drive the votes of those who feel most threatened by living on a French-speaking island in the midst of an English-speaking ocean.

Heurtel said the tendency will only be reversed by a radical change in the province’s political culture or a change to the voting system. As things stand ahead of Monday’s vote, the Coalition Avenir Québec are expected to win about 99 of the National Assembly’s 125 seats with just 39 per cent of the votes, according to opinion poll aggregator QC125.com.

The Liberals (16 per cent) are projected to take about 20 seats, Québec Solidaire (15 per cent) 10 seats and the PQ (15 per cent) just three. Despite having 14 per cent support, the Conservatives are not projected to win any seats.

But in politics, opinions and policies and allegiances are always shifting.

In politicians’ attitudes toward immigration, toward newcomers, there will be changes as well, said Dahine, the doctor. It just might take a while.

“As immigration happens — because it’s going to happen, because people need workers and brains and hands and arms — kids are going to grow up with a different picture of what society is. It’s going to be the new normal and one day it won’t be about where you come from but, ‘Hey! You’re from here as well,’” he said.

“It’s as though you’ll have a different flavour you add to the original Quebec recipe. Let’s put it that way.”

Source: Why Quebec’s election turned into a slugfest over immigration

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

How Quebec’s 1995 referendum was a turning point for racist comments in political discourse that’s still felt

2022/10/03 Leave a comment

Of note:

Standing on a stage in Montreal Wednesday night, singer Allison Russell recalled what it was like to live in the city after the Parti Québécois lost the referendum 27 years ago.

“I was spat on, called a monkey and told to go back to Africa,” Russell, who is Black and was born in Montreal, told the audience.

In defeat, former premier Jacques Parizeau had blamed the 1995 loss on “money and ethnic votes.”

Russell, who was 17 at the time, said the comments sparked racist acts in the streets and contributed to her decision to move away shortly afterward. She compared the remark to recent comments about immigration made by Coalition Avenir Québec candidate Jean Boulet and party leader François Legault.

The topic has dominated political discourse in the last days and weeks of the campaign.

In a local debate on Radio-Canada last week, Boulet — who serves as both the province’s labour and immigration minister —  said “80 per cent of immigrants go to Montreal, don’t work, don’t speak French or don’t adhere to the values of Quebec society.”

After Radio-Canada brought the comments to light this week, Boulet issued an apology on Twitter, saying he misspoke and that the statement about immigrants not working and not speaking French “does not reflect what I think.”

Legault said Boulet didn’t deserve to keep the immigration file if re-elected. But Legault himself said Monday that welcoming more than 50,000 immigrants per year would be “a bit suicidal,”referring to the protection of the French language.

Earlier this month, Legault apologized for citing the threat of “extremism” and “violence” as well as the need to preserve Quebec’s way of life as reasons to limit the number of immigrants to the province.

Aly Ndiaye, a Quebec-city based historian and rapper also known as Webster, said he sees the 1995 referendum loss and Parizeau’s remark as a turning point for Quebec nationalism that made way for the kind of things Boulet and Legault have said this election campaign.

From inclusive nationalism to a change in Quebec identity

In the 1960s and 70s, Quebec’s nationalist movement was intent on being progressive and inclusive, Ndiaye said. The movement was inspired by decolonization and revolutions happening across the world at the time — it was looking “outward,” he said.

“After Parizeau, there was a closure,” Ndiaye said. Quebec nationalism turned inward, he added.

“There started to be a more exclusive vision of Quebec identity… That’s what Legault represents.”

What worries Ndiaye is the fact that such comments are rarely labelled as racist, despite the fact that they stem from a vision of society that sees immigrants and their descendants as “second-class citizens.”

“The Legault government is a racist, xenophobic and Islamophobic government,” Ndiaye said. “It’s aberrant.”

Hate calls

Fo Niemi, who founded the Montreal Center for Research-Action on Race Relations (CRARR) in 1983, said he remembers the Parizeau moment clearly.

“I almost fell off my chair,” he said.

Niemi said the centre received hate calls in the days following the Oct. 30, 1995 vote and stopped answering the phone for two or three days as a result.

When it comes to racist comments made in this year’s provincial election, Niemi said that while there is a possibility they could lead to violence, or aggression against immigrants, they could also lead to an overall negative attitude in Quebec toward immigration and immigrants.

“Let’s be clear, we’re not talking about all immigrants. We’re talking about immigrants who are clearly identifiable, i.e. non-white immigrants.”

He agrees with Ndiaye about the hesitation to name racism.

“They don’t call a spade a spade,” Niemi said, calling the CAQ remarks “dog whistle politics,” which refers to the use of messages that convey a particular — usually racist — sentiment to a target audience.

Evelyn Calugay, who runs PINAY, a Filipino women’s rights group, said she remembers hearing about comments made to people in her community as well as to people of Chinese descent in 1995.

Stuff like, “You don’t know how to speak French? Go back to where you belong, where you came from,” Calugay said.

“They will always have somebody to blame and the people they have to blame are always the minorities, the marginalized — because they are a bunch of racists to me!” she said with a bit of a laugh.

Calugay came to Quebec in 1975 to work as a nurse. She is 76.

What happens after the election?

The CAQ isn’t the only party to have come under fire for anti-immigrant sentiments. Comments about Quebec Muslims from Parti Québécois candidates Lyne Jubinville, Suzanne Gagnon and Pierre Vanier and his wife Catherine Provost have surfaced in the past two weeks.

Vanier, the candidate for Rousseau, and Provost, the candidate for neighbouring L’Assomption, were both suspended by PQ Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon Friday for posts they made on social media, one of which questioned the intelligence of Muslim women who wear head scarves.

Whatever the election result Monday, Niemi says his concern is what will happen afterward.

“Are we going to talk about the negative fallout of all of these, shall we say, hateful statements?” he said. “What credibility will the government have to address racism and xenophobia and any other negative consequence of these statements?”

As for Russell, the Quebec-born singer now lives in Nashville with her family and recently, after playing in well-known American folk bands, began a solo career with her album Outside Child.

Source: How Quebec’s 1995 referendum was a turning point for racist comments in political discourse that’s still felt

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , ,

Raj: NDP puts minority rights aside as it courts Quebec

2022/10/01 Leave a comment

Of note:

The federal NDP and the Green Party’s Elizabeth May voted to endorse the use of the notwithstanding clause and Quebec’s controversial Bill 96 Wednesday, by supporting Bloc Québécois legislation that strips the rights of non-francophones in the province.

The Bloc sought to amend several pieces of federal legislation to impose French as the dominant language in the province and tried to prevent Ottawa from contesting Quebec’s contentious language moves.

Its bill C-238, which was defeated Wednesday, would have changed the Citizenship Act so that Quebec residents can only become citizens if they have “adequate knowledge of French.” Everywhere else in Canada, residents must only demonstrate they speak either French or English. 

The bill also amended the Canada Labour Code, the Official Languages Act, and the Canadian Business Corporations Act by subjecting them to Quebec’s French language charter. 

Whatever the government of Quebec put into its charter would tie Ottawa’s hands.

This is concerning when you consider the nationalist Coalition Avenir Quebec — which is likely to be re-elected with a sweeping majority Monday — passed Bill 96 earlier this year. That legislation amended the French language charter to prevent many English speakers from speaking to each other in English at work (or in a language other than French); made it difficult for employers to require employees know any language other than French; and banned many people from accessing government services in English — even when they are available. It even gave the province the right to enter private businesses without a warrant to ensure emails, for example, are being sent in French and gave individuals the right to seek damages in court if their language rights are breached.

Quebec’s charter also imposes unnecessary hardship on newcomers, forcing them to learn French within six months of their arrival — after which the government only communicates with them in French. Expecting new arrivals to learn a language in six months is not only unrealistic but sets them up for failure.

And yet, this is what NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh and his MPs voted for Wednesday. This from a party that prides itself on standing up for minority rights.

Quebec Premier François Legault has pre-emptively used the notwithstanding clause twice now to avoid legal challenges arising from obvious reaches of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, most recently with Bill 96 and previously with Bill 21, a law that prevents Quebecers employed in certain professions such as teachers, judges, and police officers from wearing religious symbols. Just last year, an elementary teacher in Chelsea, Que., was removed from her classroom for wearing a head scarf.

It’s hard to believe this is the kind of behaviour the NDP — or Elizabeth May, now a candidate for the leadership of the Green Party — wants to be associated with.

The decline of French in Quebec is a real concern. It is one shared by many allophones and anglophones in Quebec too. But subjecting federal laws to a provincial government, especially one that has questioned publicly why it should be subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is another thing altogether.

And while the NDP wants to have it both ways — by claiming it is standing up for the protection of the French language and respecting anglophone minority rights — its actions this week show it isn’t doing both. It also raises questions about whether the party is ready to contest for power if it is unwilling to assert Ottawa’s jurisdiction.

New Democrats note that they’ve always supported the idea that federal institutions operating in Quebec should be subject to the province’s language charter. The NDP’s only Quebec MP, Alexandre Boulerice, noted last spring that it made little sense for credit unions in the province to operate under different laws than federally-regulated banks. Bill 96, however, has changed that conversation.

Language is touchy in Quebec. The vast majority of Quebecers support Bill 96. Most of the province’s political parties do too. In fact, Quebec Liberals are polling in the single digits with francophones, likely due to their opposition to Bill 96 and Bill 21. 

For nearly two decades now, the NDP has embraced asymmetrical federalism with Quebec, including supporting the principle that 50 per cent plus one vote is enough to split the country. That position is credited for the party’s big win in 2011. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that yet again the NDP places chasing francophone support in Quebec above all else.

Montreal Liberal MP Anthony Housefather, who helped convince his own caucus and lobbied opposition MPs to vote against the bill, said he was “very relieved” by its defeat. “Using the notwithstanding clause to deny people rights … is just very alarming,” he told the Star.

The silver lining in Wednesday’s vote came from the Liberals and notably Conservative MPs who unanimously stood opposed. Just 18 months ago, on a similar motion, all but one Conservative voted with the Bloc.

A new leader and a 2021 election that saw the Conservatives’ hopes for a big win in Quebec dashed seem to have contributed to an epiphany. That or Pierre Poilievre realized there are more votes to be had fighting the notwithstanding clause outside Quebec than endorsing it inside the province.

Source: NDP puts minority rights aside as it courts Quebec

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Boisvert: La peur de l’étranger [Quebec’s immigration minister’s comments]

2022/10/01 Leave a comment

Good commentary on Quebec’s immigration minister that begs the question of his competence and knowledge:

Imaginons un ministre de l’Éducation qui ne connaît pas la différence entre une école primaire et secondaire. Un ministre des Transports confondant un aéroport et une autoroute. C’est trop gros ?

Dans ce gouvernement, vous pouvez être ministre de l’Immigration et ne pas connaître les faits les plus élémentaires sur les immigrants.

François Legault et tout son entourage ont sauté au plafond en entendant Jean Boulet dire que 80 % des immigrants sont à Montréal et « ne travaillent pas, ne parlent pas français ou n’adhèrent pas aux valeurs de la société québécoise ». Le ministre s’est « disqualifié », a dit François Legault à Midi Info.

Il a sauté au plafond d’abord parce que c’est faux, archifaux. Les immigrants ont à peu près le même taux d’emploi que les Québécois nés ici. Et la vaste majorité parlent français.

Le ministre se base sur quoi pour dire qu’ils « n’adhèrent pas aux valeurs de la société québécoise » ? Ils doivent pourtant passer un test… S’ils sont venus ici, c’est généralement qu’ils ont voté avec leurs pieds pour adhérer à cette société. L’histoire de l’immigration au Québec est largement une histoire de succès, quoi qu’on en dise.

Mais non, le ministre de l’Immigration lui-même véhicule de fausses informations et renforce les préjugés. Il suinte de tout ça une ignorance profonde, une peur sourde de l’étranger.

Ce ne serait déjà pas acceptable comme candidat de plonger aussi joyeusement dans la piscine des préjugés et des fausses informations.

Mais quand on est ministre, et ministre de l’Immigration, c’est impardonnable. D’autant que ce gouvernement insiste sur la capacité d’accueil, sur la difficulté d’intégrer, sur la menace qui pèse sur le français.

Coudonc, leurs politiques (quotas, apprentissage de la langue en six mois, etc.) sont-elles basées sur des données, ou sur des chroniques anti-immigration du Journal de Montréal ?

Jean Boulet n’est pourtant pas un idiot, loin de là. Il est sans doute parmi les politiciens les plus sympathiques à Québec. Il est depuis son élection un ministre du Travail compétent. Lui-même avocat spécialisé dans le domaine, il était « sur son X ».

Quand il a été question de délester Nadine Girault de l’Immigration, l’an dernier, François Legault a voulu choisir un ministre fiable. Qui de mieux que Jean Boulet ? Un ministre de région (la Mauricie), pour envoyer un message de « régionalisation » de l’immigration.

Pourquoi pas ?

Comme la CAQ veut arrimer l’immigration aux besoins économiques, fusionner Travail et Immigration chez un même ministre, c’était le plan logique.

Mais le ministre (le troisième en quatre ans) a-t-il la moindre connaissance de la réalité immigrante à Montréal ? Et ailleurs ? Est-ce qu’il en a rencontré ? Ou est-ce une masse informe de « capital humain » à « intégrer » ?

On tentera de blâmer une vision des « régions », mais je n’accepte pas ça. Il suffit de se promener un peu pour voir que les gens de toutes les régions du Québec veulent accueillir plus d’immigrants. Le discours anti-immigrant le plus fort vient souvent de quelques chroniqueurs montréalais qui n’ont jamais le moindre mot positif à dire sur l’immigration, cultivent une détestation pour Montréal, sa diversité, et selon qui « y a pas moyen de se faire servir en français à Montréal » – autre mensonge tenu pour vérité scientifique parce que répété assez souvent.

N’allez pas croire que cette « gaffe » était préméditée. Ça date d’une semaine, dans un débat à la radio locale. Et ça ne fait pas du tout l’affaire de François Legault.

Jean Boulet a piteusement présenté ses excuses, disant que ces propos ne reflétaient pas sa « pensée ».

Quelle pensée ? Il faisait des affirmations statistiques, du haut de son autorité de ministre de l’Immigration. Ça n’avait rien d’une opinion. Si le ministre des Finances dit qu’il y a un taux de chômage de 25 % à Québec, il n’exprime pas sa « pensée ». Il trompe les gens.

C’est comme si les peurs et les préjugés refoulés sortaient au grand jour.

La journée avait pourtant bien commencé pour François Legault, à la Chambre de commerce du Montréal métropolitain.

Aller visiter une chambre de commerce pour lui, c’est un peu comme aller faire un tour dans un cégep pour Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois : ça met de bonne humeur.

François Legault était dans sa matière forte à jaser PIB et productivité devant un auditoire réceptif, avec ses ministres économiques. Clair, convaincu, confiant, de bonne humeur.

On lui reproche de ne pas parler d’éducation. Il est d’accord. Mais chaque fois qu’il veut parler de l’augmentation « historique » du salaire des profs, de maternelles 4 ans ou d’orthopédagogie, les médias en font fi. Dans les points de presse, c’est toujours des questions sur l’immigration, ou le troisième lien. Troisième lien, immigration. Immigration, troisième lien.

Vrai.

C’est pourtant bien lui qui dit, comme mercredi, qu’une augmentation des seuils d’immigration serait « un peu suicidaire » pour la « nation québécoise ». Et je ne reviens pas sur tout le reste.

C’est lui qui a nommé Jean Boulet. On est obligé de se demander comment ils parlent d’immigration entre eux, au plus haut niveau, quand le titulaire est aussi mal informé. Est-ce que c’est juste des faux chiffres et des histoires de peur ?

Ce sujet est trop important pour l’avenir du Québec pour être traité avec autant d’incompétence. Si, comme prévu, la CAQ forme le prochain gouvernement, surtout, ne « continuons » pas ça.

Source: La peur de l’étranger

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Legault says accepting more than 50,000 immigrants in Quebec per year would be ‘a bit suicidal’

2022/09/30 Leave a comment

Unlikely to have any impact in the election but another in a series of dog whistle politics, unlike the immigration minister who states his positions clearly (before having to apologize and retract – see Le Devoir article following this one for the factual analysis. You would of course like to think that a minister responsible for immigration would have the basic facts right):
The Coalition Avenir Québec is once again coming under fire for comments about immigration, including party leader François Legault saying that welcoming more than 50,000 immigrants per year would be “a bit suicidal.” Legault made that statement on Monday at the Montreal Chamber of Commerce while alluding to the need to protect the French language. Although his words drew criticism from his opponents, Legault also reprimanded one of his ministers on Monday for making his own controversial remarks about immigration. During a local debate on Radio-Canada last week, Jean Boulet — who serves as both the province’s labour and immigration minister —  said “80 per cent of immigrants go to Montreal, don’t work, don’t speak French or don’t adhere to the values of Quebec society.” Boulet then touted his party’s efforts to better welcome newcomers and get them speaking French. Shortly after Radio-Canada reached out to Boulet’s team today, he issued an apology on Twitter, saying he misspoke and the statement about immigrants not working and not speaking French “does not reflect what I think.” “I am sorry for having poorly expressed my thoughts,” said Boulet, who is seeking re-election in the Trois-Rivières riding. “We must continue to focus on the reception … and integration of immigrants, who are a source of wealth for Quebec.” Despite the apology, his words appeared to have cost him his immigration portfolio, if the CAQ is re-elected. Legault described Boulet’s statement as “unacceptable.” He was also asked if Boulet could remain as immigration minister if the CAQ is re-elected. “Unfortunately, I don’t think so,” he told Radio-Canada, adding that it’s a “question of image, perception and trust.” The CAQ campaign has been marred by controversial comments on immigration. Three weeks ago, Legault apologized for citing the threat of “extremism” and “violence” as well as the need to preserve Quebec’s way of life as reasons to limit the number of immigrants to the province.
That same week, he said non-French speaking immigration, if not limited in number, could pose a threat to social cohesion in the province.

Opponents blast Legault’s party for ‘divisive’ message

Opponents of the CAQ blasted the comments made by Legault and Boulet. During a news conference on Monday, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, the co-spokesperson for Québec Solidaire said Legault’s comments about welcoming more than 50,000 newcomers per year were “hurtful” and “irresponsible.” Reporters also played him audio of Boulet’s comments. Nadeau-Dubois accused Legault of setting the tone within his party when it came to talking about immigration. “Since the beginning of the campaign, what Mr. Legault has done is send the signal that when you talk about immigration, you talk about it in a negative way, a divisive way,” he said.
When Mr. Legault sets the tone like that and says that immigration is dangerous for Quebec, it’s not only hurting people, it’s, I think, deeply not representative of what Quebecers actually think.” During her own news conference, Liberal Leader Dominique Anglade described Boulet’s comments as “mind-boggling.” “It’s dividing Quebecers. It’s dividing the population,” she said. Anglade called on Quebecers to put an end to the CAQ’s “politics of division.” “There are two options on the table. There’s this one option where we’ve already hit a wall and we keep dividing Quebecers…. And there’s another route: the route of the Liberal party where we say we need to unite.” She also said Legault’s reference to suicide showed a “flagrant lack of empathy.”
Source: Legault says accepting more than 50,000 immigrants in Quebec per year would be ‘a bit suicidal’
« 80 % des immigrants s’en vont à Montréal, ne travaillent pas, ne parlent pas français ou n’adhèrent pas aux valeurs de la société québécoise. La clé, c’est la régionalisation et la francisation. » Cette citation du ministre sortant de l’Immigration, Jean Boulet, a lancé un pavé dans la mare des débats sur l’immigration au Québec. Qu’en est-il réellement ? Vérification en trois graphiques. La part de nouveaux arrivants qui s’installent à Montréal décline au Québec depuis 2018. Pas plus de 70 % d’entre eux préféraient la métropole l’an dernier, selon l’Institut de la statistique du Québec. Par contre, si l’on entend par « Montréal », « Montréal et ses banlieues », Jean Boulet n’a pas tort. Année après année, plus de 80 % des Néo-Québécois s’établissent soit sur l’île de Montréal, soit à Laval ou en Montérégie. Au-delà de la dichotomie entre Montréal et les régions, notons que la ville de Québec attire de plus en plus d’immigrants depuis quelques années, passant de 5 % en 2018 à 8 % en 2021. Ces données ne concernent que les « destinations projetées » des candidats admis à l’immigration. Leur destination finale peut donc différer, et leur destination déclarée ne signifie pas qu’ils y resteront toute leur vie. La « francisation » Les nouveaux arrivants ne parlent-ils pas français ? En effet, il y a quatre ou cinq ans, la moitié d’entre eux ne possédaient aucune connaissance du français. La part d’immigrants qui ne pouvait s’exprimer qu’en anglais dépassait alors la proportion de ceux qui ne pouvaient s’exprimer qu’en français. Depuis, la tendance s’est inversée, et c’est plutôt le bilinguisme qui domine sur la langue des nouveaux Québécois. Nous pouvons même parler de multilinguisme, car environ 70 % des nouveaux arrivants possèdent une langue maternelle qui n’est ni le français ni l’anglais. Statistique Canada recense environ 150 langues maternelles différentes parlées dans les chaumières du Québec. Au boulot Les immigrants sont-ils majoritairement sans emploi ? Il est vrai que les Néo-Québécois, surtout ceux qui viennent tout juste d’arriver, peinent davantage à trouver de l’emploi. L’écart entre le taux de chômage de Québécois nés ici et ceux nés ailleurs s’explique surtout par la difficulté à faire reconnaître les compétences, observait une récente étude du Comité consultatif personnes immigrantes. Même s’il est en baisse, le taux de chômage des immigrants n’a pas retrouvé les seuils d’avant la pandémie. Cependant, la statistique inverse, le taux d’emploi, démontre que les nouveaux arrivants veulent travailler plus que jamais. En 2021, le nombre de personnes immigrantes en emploi au Québec s’élevait à 818 700, un sommet depuis 2006, soit la première année où ces données ont été compilées. Cette croissance s’observe autant chez les personnes immigrantes arrivées au pays récemment que chez celles établies de longue date. Le Québec a même rattrapé l’Ontario en matière d’emploi chez les immigrants dans la force de l’âge. Près de 82 % des Néo-Québécois entre 25 et 54 ans sont occupés par le boulot, comparativement à 81 % dans la province voisine, selon le dernier rapport de l’Institut du Québec.
Source: Les propos de Jean Boulet à l’épreuve des faits

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Le Devoir editorial: Impasse fédérale en immigration

2022/09/26 Leave a comment

Of interest, Le Devoir’s take on the positions of Quebec parties on immigration, ending with the understandable (and traditional) concern that Quebec will have less demographic weight in Canada given its more restrictive policies.

While the Liberal government has embraced increasing immigration, rightly or wrongly there is a general consensus among the major federal parties and provinces other than Quebec in favour of increased immigration:

Pour la plus grande partie de la campagne électorale, le débat sur l’immigration s’est limité à une affaire de seuils dans l’accueil des nouveaux arrivants. Les propos malencontreux du chef caquiste, François Legault, qui a présenté l’immigration comme une menace à la paix sociale, avant de s’excuser, ont inutilement teinté les discussions.

Pour le premier ministre sortant, il aurait été si simple de s’élever au-dessus de la mêlée et de rappeler, sans sacrifier la protection de la nation québécoise, que le Québec est une terre d’accueil riche de sa diversité et de ses métissages culturels. Ses maladresses font en sorte que les positions raisonnées et les réalisations de la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) en matière d’immigration attirent la suspicion.

La CAQ propose entre autres d’accueillir 50 000 immigrants par année et d’exiger qu’une plus grande proportion de ceux-ci parlent déjà le français à leur arrivée. M. Legault en fait une condition essentielle pour assurer l’avenir du français au Québec, car il y a des limites à la vélocité de l’intégration des immigrants au tissu et à la culture francophones. Son gouvernement a doublé les budgets alloués à la francisation pour les faire passer à 168 millions de dollars par année, une excellente initiative qui souffre des inégalités dans la qualité et l’accessibilité de la formation. L’État québécois ne sait même pas combien d’entreprises participent aux cours de francisation. Les incohérences sont nombreuses, comme en témoigne le cas récent du programme de francisation exemplaire de Peerless, dont le financement a été retiré, puis reconduit à la suite d’un reportage du Devoir.

Il est à souhaiter que la création de Francisation Québec puisse servir à améliorer le bilan. Le Québec peut et doit faire mieux en matière d’intégration et de francisation si nous souhaitons aborder le débat sur l’immigration au-delà de l’insécurité linguistique.

Le Parti québécois (PQ) envisage aussi les seuils d’immigration à l’enseigne de la pérennité du fait français. Son chef, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, ramène la cible à 35 000 immigrants par année et exige une connaissance du français de tous les immigrants économiques avant leur arrivée. Il est le seul, avec François Legault, à lier immigration et pérennité du français sans passer par le raccourci illusoire de la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre.

Le Parti conservateur du Québec (PCQ) rejoint le PQ sur les affres du multiculturalisme, mais il le dépasse par la droite en proposant de sélectionner les immigrants en fonction d’une « compatibilité civilisationnelle » (adhésion aux valeurs occidentales et capacité d’intégration). Cette nostalgie pour une cohésion sociale fantasmée est enrobée dans un épouvantable déterminisme qui fait fi des capacités d’intégration et d’adaptation de l’être humain.

À l’autre extrémité du spectre, Québec solidaire(QS) fixe la cible maximale à 80 000 immigrants par année, sans trop s’inquiéter des conséquences. Le co-porte-parole de QS, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, a l’heureuse idée de proposer une bonification additionnelle des budgets de francisation (à 230 millions par année) et de vouloir faire découvrir la culture québécoise aux nouveaux arrivants par un « billet culture » de 200 $ par année. La mesure peut sembler anodine, mais elle a le mérite d’offrir une main tendue.

Le Parti libéral du Québec (PLQ) mise sur son habituelle approche débonnaire en matière d’immigration, dans le prolongement de son positionnement historique en faveur des droits des minorités. Dominique Anglade ne souffre d’aucune insécurité linguistique. Son invitation à « arrêter de diviser » et de présenter l’immigration comme « un problème et une menace » est apaisante en comparaison des amalgames douteux de M. Legault. Elle fait toutefois l’impasse sur les solutions nécessaires pour faciliter le transfert linguistique des nouveaux arrivants vers le français. Elle évoque sans trop de conviction la francisation et la régionalisation de l’immigration, qu’elle présente comme une solution à la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre (tout comme Québec solidaire). Cette relation de causalité entre immigration et emploi ne fait pas l’unanimité.

À force de traiter de la question de l’immigration à partir des capacités d’accueil du Québec, nous avons tendance à oublier que le réel problème se situe à Ottawa, où loge un premier ministre postnational qui embrasse un projet de croissance démographique basé sur l’apport migratoire. Les libéraux de Justin Trudeau ne respectent pas l’entente Canada-Québec sur l’immigration. Le processus migratoire fédéral désavantage les francophones, notamment chez les étudiants étrangers. Toutes les actions du fédéral en matière d’immigration nous portent à conclure qu’il ne se soucie pas du déclin du poids démographique des francophones au Québec et au Canada.

Le rapatriement des pleins pouvoirs en immigration est la mesure qui compte le plus, mais aucune des formations ne sera en position de réussir ce tour de force. Tel est notre véritable drame en matière d’immigration.

Source: Impasse fédérale en immigration

 

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Quebec election: Immigration becomes political fodder as parties spar over ‘capacity’

2022/09/20 Leave a comment

More takes on the Quebec immigration election debates. Appears, however, that immigration has receded somewhat as a focus of the campaign. But the hope of the Conseil du patronat for discussions “in a calm, factual and rational way” is likely a stretch:

The head of a major employers’ group in Quebec says an election campaign is not the time to have a serious discussion about immigration.

Campaign slogans and political messages aren’t suited for rational conversations about how newcomers contribute positively to the economy, Karl Blackburn, president and CEO of the Conseil du patronat du Québec, said in a recent interview.

“And we are very much aware that these are sensitive issues, particularly around language,” Blackburn said.

But three weeks in, party leaders have not shied away from putting immigration front and centre in the Quebec campaign. The debate has so far been su

Blackburn, meanwhile, says Quebec has the capacity — and desperately needs — to accept up to 100,000 immigrants a year in order to address labour shortages that are negatively affecting the quality, price and availability of goods and services across Quebec. That number is a non-starter for Legault, whose party has a commanding lead in the polls and who wants to keep the level of immigrants at 50,000 per year — the maximum, he says, that Quebec can integrate properly and teach French.

Political scientists and economists, however, say there isn’t any research that offers definitive answers to the question of how many immigrants a society — including Quebec — can welcome.

For Pierre Fortin, professor emeritus of economics at Université du Québec à Montréal, Blackburn’s number is “wacky” and would bring “administrative chaos” to society. Increasing immigration levels to more than 80,000 a year, he said, risks creating “xenophobia and racism” toward immigrants and pushing voters into the arms of people who would drastically cut the number of newcomers to the province.

But Mireille Paquet, political science professor at Concordia University, strongly challenged that theory, adding that the research is inconclusive.

“What we know for sure,” she said, “is that what causes the backlash (against immigrants) is not, per se, the number of immigrants but feelings of insecurity in the non-immigrant population, and that feeling can be brought up by public policies, such as cutting social services … it’s something politicians can address,” she said in a recent interview.

Paquet said the idea that there is a limited “capacity to integrate” is often touted by restrictionists and people on the right as a reason to curtail immigration. The debate, she said, should not be around the rate of arrival or the number of annual immigrants, but on what the government is going to do to ease feelings of insecurity in the local population.

“It also depends on what is our expectation of integration,” she said. “What is good integration? That has changed over time, and that will continue to change.”

The debate over immigration during the election campaign has also focused on whether more newcomers would help solve the labour shortages plaguing the province. 

Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon says it won’t, and he is promising to cut immigration to 35,000 a year and only accept people who already speak French. The Liberals’ number is 70,000 newcomers a year, and Québec solidaire says it wants to accept up to 80,000 immigrants a year in order to have enough people to help build its ambitious climate change projects.

Fortin is adamant that immigrants do not address labour shortages but could even exacerbate them. Even if a company solves its labour problems by hiring foreigners, he said, those newcomers will be looking to spend money, consume services and products, seek health care, and enrol their children in school.

That extra spending creates demand and requires more production from Quebec companies, Fortin said. “You solve a shortage in one area and it reappears in another.”

His solution, however, is not politically palatable — especially during an election campaign. The only way to solve labour shortages, he said, is to increase unemployment.

Blackburn, for his part, is calling on whichever party wins on Oct. 3 to convene a forum with stakeholders to discuss — in a calm, factual and rational way — the best way to address the labour shortages that he says are causing billions in dollars of losses to companies across the province.

“We should not see immigrants as consumers of public services,” Blackburn said. “They are here to contribute to the economic vitality of Quebec.”

Source: Quebec election: Immigration becomes political fodder as parties spar over ‘capacity’

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Non-Francophone immigration a threat to ‘tightly woven’ Quebec cohesion: Legault

2022/09/14 Leave a comment

Not a dog-whistle, a megaphone, but unlikely to change the results:

Non-Francophone immigration is a threat to cohesion in Quebec, incumbent premier François Legault said Sunday.

The leader of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) party had just delivered a speech to a few hundred supporters at the Le Dauphin hotel in Drummondville.

He addressed the importance of protecting the cohesion of the “tightly woven” Quebec nation, at the heart of which “there is our language, French.”

“Sometimes, this cohesion is shaken,” he said.

“The premier of Quebec, the only head of state in North America who represents a majority of Francophones, has a duty to stop the decline of French in Quebec,” he continued.

Asked in a press scrum who represented a threat to national cohesion, Legault pointed to the parties “who want to welcome 70,000, 80,000 newcomers a year.”

“It’s like math. If we want to stop the decline, for a certain period of time, we have to better integrate newcomers into French.”

François Legault’s CAQ has a goal of welcoming 50,000 immigrants annually, 80 per cent of whom would speak French upon arrival.

The Parti Québécois (PQ) would lower those thresholds to 35,000, while the Quebec Liberal Party would keep them at 70,000 and Quebec solidaire (QS) would raise them to 80,000.

Last Wednesday, Legault created a controversy when he spoke of Quebec values such as pacifism and respect, and equated immigration with violence and extremism.

He later said he was sorry if his remarks were confusing.

‘CLUMSY AND HURTFUL’

Quebec solidaire spokesperson Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois called Legault’s words on immigration “clumsy” and “hurtful” on Sunday.

“I’m tired of François Legault always talking about immigration as a problem, as a threat, as something that weakens us as a nation,” he said.

His remarks were also criticized by Liberal leader Dominique Anglade.

“The Ukrainians who flee the bombs, the Italians, the Greeks, the Mexicans, the Portuguese, the Vietnamese, (…) is it a threat to our nation?” she questioned.

“It is your speech François Legault that threatens social cohesion,” she said.

PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon also criticized Legault for making “divisive statements” that were “not very responsible.”

“When we talk about threats, fear, we will play in an emotional register to try to make people forget that the CAQ is complicit and largely responsible for the decline of French,” he accused.

“The record of François Legault is that he will have welcomed 120,000 immigrants who do not speak French in his mandate,” St-Pierre Plamondon added.

RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS

On Sunday, Legault disagreed with the incumbent MNA for Sherbrooke, Christine Labrie, who said that banning the veil was a form of oppression.

QS promises to end the ban on religious symbols for government employees in positions of authority, such as teachers.

“We should, if we talk about teachers, think about children,” replied François Legault. “I think that a six-year-old girl who has a teacher with a religious sign has the right to a certain neutrality.”

“If you look at it from the point of view of the person who gives the service, well, it is a constraint, but if you look at it from the point of view of the person who receives the service, I think that in Quebec, we are a secular society,” he continued.

“I find it unfortunate that QS wants to question this, like the Liberal party.”

Source: Non-Francophone immigration a threat to ‘tightly woven’ Quebec cohesion: Legault

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Legault prêt à marchander avec Ottawa au sujet de l’immigration

2022/09/13 Leave a comment

Possibility of discussion compared to some of his earlier positions:

Le chef de la Coalition avenir Québec, François Legault, est prêt à renoncer à sa demande de posséder les « pleins pouvoirs en immigration » si le gouvernement fédéral s’engage à sélectionner davantage de personnes maîtrisant la langue française.

M. Legault donne désormais le choix à Ottawa « soit de nous donner les pouvoirs [de sélection des immigrants économiques qui lui restent], c’est ce qu’on préfère, soit d’être plus exigeant sur la connaissance du français ».

En effet, il pourrait se satisfaire d’un engagement de la part du gouvernement fédéral à retenir une plus grande proportion de candidats à l’immigration québécoise qui connaissent le français parmi ceux qui sont inscrits à son programme de regroupement familial ou encore à son programme de travailleurs étrangers temporaires.

La CAQ propose d’accueillir un maximum de 50 000 immigrants par année, dont un maximum de 10 000 immigrants non francophones, à défaut de quoi le Québec se heurterait à des difficultés d’intégration. « 80 % [de francophones], c’est un bel objectif », a fait remarquer M. Legault lors d’un nouvel arrêt de son autobus de campagne à Drummondville, dimanche.

Cohésion nationale

Autrement, la « cohésion nationale » pourrait s’effilocher, selon lui. « On a un devoir de protéger cette cohésion nationale. Puis, au coeur de cette cohésion, de cette nation, il y a notre langue, le français. Puis, le premier ministre du Québec, qui est le seul chef d’État en Amérique du Nord qui représente une majorité de francophones, a un devoir : arrêter ce déclin du français au Québec », a soutenu le chef caquiste devant des dizaines de sympathisants rassemblés à Drummondville dimanche après-midi.

Plus tard, M. Legault a laissé entendre que les cibles d’immigration préconisées par Québec solidaire (entre 60 000 et 80 000 immigrants par année) et le Parti libéral du Québec (70 000 immigrants par année) mineraient la « cohésion » de la nation québécoise si elles étaient suivies. « C’est sûr que les partis qui veulent aller à 70 000 ou 80 000, par année, de nouveaux arrivants, c’est comme mathématique… Si on veut arrêter le déclin pendant un certain temps, il faut mieux intégrer les nouveaux arrivants au français », a-t-il affirmé dans une mêlée de presse. « C’est important pour garder cette cohésion nationale de défendre le français », a-t-il aussi dit, parlant même d’« urgence ». « Il y a des clans, il y a des camps, il y a des factions, pas juste au Québec. On voit ça aux États-Unis. On voit ça en France. Et, il faut toujours être prudent de garder cette cohésion de notre nation. »

Dans sa plateforme électorale, la CAQ dit vouloir poursuivre la « grande relance linguistique » amorcée par l’adoption de la Loi sur la langue officielle et commune du Québec, le français (PL 96) au printemps dernier.

Pour y arriver, le parti politique de François Legault réclame les « pleins pouvoirs en immigration », ce à quoi le premier ministre fédéral, Justin Trudeau, a opposé une fin de non-recevoir.

Il compte aussi « entreprendre une révision en profondeur de l’ensemble des programmes d’enseignement du français » aux jeunes et aux Québécois d’expression anglaise, en plus de favoriser la création de « séries stimulantes, 100 % en français, bien ancrées dans la réalité québécoise, et ce, dans un environnement sécuritaire, sans publicité ».

Aux commandes de l’État québécois depuis près de quatre ans, François Legault dit avoir « le goût de continuer de servir le Québec, au meilleur de [ses] capacités ». « Je ne suis pas parfait, on commence à le savoir ! Je fais des erreurs. Parfois, je réponds à des questions auxquelles je ne devrais pas répondre », a-t-il mentionné, dans un clin d’oeil aux propos qu’il a tenus la semaine dernière sur les risques posés par une immigration soutenue sur les valeurs québécoises de « laïcité » et de « pacifisme ». « Quand je fais des erreurs, je les corrige », a-t-il poursuivi.

Source: Legault prêt à marchander avec Ottawa au sujet de l’immigration

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

André Pratte: Quebec political parties are competing for the worst immigration policy

2022/09/12 Leave a comment

Pratte captures well the conundrum facing Quebec – increase immigration to match the rest of Canada and maintain its current demographic and political weight, or continue its relative population decline in relation to other provinces and thus face future questioning of its share of MPs.
That being said, governments in the rest of Canada would benefit from greater questioning of the demographic arguments (weak) justifying increased immigration levels:
Week 2 of the Quebec election campaign was dominated by the immigration issue: how many newcomers should the province welcome each year? Premier François Legault’s answer was telling: his models are Switzerland and the Scandinavian states, which he described as “extraordinarily wealthy, dynamic countries.” The problem is that if it excessively limits immigration, Quebec risks becoming a small, relatively poor nation.
Throughout Quebec’s history, immigration has been a sensitive topic. Before 1960, foreigners were seen as a threat to the province’s Catholicism. Since the Quiet Revolution, Quebecers have been concerned about the French language’s future. The latest census data released by Statistics Canada in August appear to confirm that because a significant number of immigrants to Quebec adopt English as their second language, the proportion of French speakers in the province is slowly decreasing.

Source: André Pratte: Quebec political parties are competing for the worst immigration policy

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →