Le débat sur l’islamophobie au Québec fait des flammèches

2019/02/02 Leave a comment

Walking back his earlier remarks which nevertheless revealed his lack of understanding and awareness:

Y a-t-il ou non des manifestations d’islamophobie au Québec ? Oui, a concédé le premier ministre Legault vendredi, au lendemain d’une déclaration controversée qui lui a valu de vives critiques — mais aussi le soutien inattendu d’une élue municipale. Mais de là à reconnaître qu’il y a un « courant islamophobe » dans la province, il y a un pas que François Legault refuse de faire.

Jeudi, le chef caquiste était catégorique : « Il n’y a pas d’islamophobie au Québec. »

Il mettait ainsi un terme à la discussion autour de la création possible d’une Journée contre l’islamophobie.

Vendredi, le cabinet du premier ministre a précisé que « M. Legault voulait dire qu’il n’y a pas de courant islamophobe au Québec. Il existe de l’islamophobie, de la xénophobie, du racisme, de la haine, mais pas de courant islamophobe. Le Québec n’est pas islamophobe ou raciste. »

Cette décision de ne pas faire du 29 janvier (date anniversaire de la tuerie de la mosquée de Québec) une journée dédiée à la lutte contre l’islamophobie a été saluée vendredi par la mairesse suppléante de Gatineau, Nathalie Lemieux.

Dans une entrevue au quotidien Le Droit, l’élue a soutenu que « ce mot n’existe même pas. Justin Trudeau pense que l’islamophobie existe, mais c’est lui qui invente ce problème. Il tente de provoquer des problèmes où il n’y en a pas. Les Québécois ne sont pas aussi racistes que certains voudraient le faire croire. Quand un peuple veut s’intégrer, il s’intègre. [Mais] ce peuple ne s’intègre pas. »

Mme Lemieux a aussi ajouté que « ces gens-là font beaucoup de choses mal, avec leurs camions et toutes ces choses-là, et c’est normal d’en avoir peur ».

Ses propos ont été immédiatement dénoncés par le maire de la ville, Maxime Pedneaud-Jobin. « Je me dissocie complètement et je dénonce les propos tenus par la conseillère Nathalie Lemieux à l’égard de la communauté musulmane. Je lui ai immédiatement demandé de se rétracter et de s’excuser », a indiqué M. Pedneaud-Jobin sur Twitter. Le député libéral André Fortin, élu dans la région, a pour sa part écrit que la mairesse suppléante « représente bien mal notre Gatineau, notre Outaouais, notre Québec ».

Des propos peçus comme une «trahison»

Même avec la précision de vendredi, les propos de François Legault ont été perçus comme une « trahison » par Boufeldja Benabdallah, le président du Centre culturel islamique de Québec. Un « coup de massue », même.

Dans une lettre envoyée aux médias, il a écrit vendredi que la sortie du premier ministre a représenté une « insulte à notre intelligence, nous qui luttons sans cesse pour abolir l’attitude de certains contre les citoyens musulmans afin que notre société soit la meilleure et la plus juste qui soit ».

« Avec tout le respect que j’ai pour vous, indique M. Benabdallah à l’intention du premier ministre, je me permets de vous dire que vous n’avez pas mesuré la gravité de cette phrase, 48 heures à peine après la deuxième édition de la Commémoration de la tuerie de la Grande Mosquée. »

En entretien avec Le Devoir, M. Benabdallah a « salué le fait que M. Legault se soit rectifié ». Mais sur le fond, ses critiques demeurent.

« Je me suis senti trahi parce que le 29 janvier, M. Legault a eu la grande amabilité de venir aux commémorations, il était compatissant et a eu des mots extraordinaires. Mais quand il dit qu’il n’y a pas de courant islamophobe tout en reconnaissant qu’il y a des gestes graves d’islamophobie, je lui demande : d’où viennent ces gestes ? Ils viennent de l’islamophobie. »

M. Benabdallah fait valoir que reconnaître l’existence de l’islamophobie au Québec ne revient pas à dire que le Québec est islamophobe. Il dit craindre que les propos de M. Legault « ne redonnent vie à l’amalgame que les islamophobes adorent, à l’effet que nous traitons toutes les Québécois d’islamophobes ».

Le « courant est soutenu par une minorité », estime le président du centre islamique. « Mais il existe et il faut en prendre conscience, ne pas cacher une évidence. Il y a eu six morts et des blessés ici. Il y a eu plusieurs gestes haineux [pamphlets, croix gammées sur les murs de la mosquée, tête de porc tranchée, etc.]. Doit-on nier tout cela pour dire qu’il n’y a pas d’islamophobie au Québec ? »

M. Benabdallah précise autrement qu’il n’a pas « d’objection au refus de la proposition d’une Journée contre l’islamophobie. Je ne me sens ni frustré ni trop malheureux, quoique déçu. »

Barrette nuance

Plus tôt dans la journée, le député libéral Gaétan Barrette avait lui aussi fait valoir que « l’islamophobie existe [au Québec] comme partout ailleurs. Je ne dis pas que c’est systémique, je ne dis pas que la société est islamophobe. Je dis qu’il y a des gens, sans aucun doute, qui le sont. De faire une affirmation aussi catégorique que celle de François Legault, ça m’apparaît être une assez courte vue d’esprit », a-t-il indiqué.

Son chef, Pierre Arcand, a bien accueilli la précision faite par M. Legault vendredi. « Il reconnaît qu’il s’est trompé […], c’est pas mal une excuse, il a corrigé le tir et moi je suis satisfait. »

Le Conseil national des musulmans canadiens (CNMC) avait quant à lui dénoncé des commentaires jugés offensants et inexacts.

Selon Statistique Canada, le nombre de crimes motivés par la haine déclarés à la police a fortement augmenté en 2017 au pays. Les incidents ciblant les Noirs, les juifs et les musulmans ont été à l’origine de la majeure partie de cette hausse.

Source: Le débat sur l’islamophobie au Québec fait des flammèches

In the Globe:

Quebec Premier François Legault has clarified his controversial comments about Islamophobia, now saying such discrimination exists but that it is not widespread.

In a statement Friday, the premier’s office said Legault meant to say that there isn’t an “undercurrent” of Islamophobia in Quebec.

“Quebecers are open and tolerant and will continue to be,” the statement said.

“Unfortunately, too many racist acts still occur today in our society, and everything must be done to denounce and combat hatred and intolerance. We will continue to honour the memory of the six victims of the tragedy of the Quebec mosque on Jan. 29.”

Friday’s statement comes after the premier told reporters Thursday that there’s no need for a day devoted to action against Islamophobia because it’s not a problem in the province. Legault was responding to calls for the anniversary of the Quebec mosque shooting to be established as an anti-Islamaphobia day.

“I don’t think there is Islamophobia in Quebec, so I don’t see why there would be a day dedicated to Islamophobia,” he said Thursday.

Those comments prompted an outpouring of criticism from Muslim groups. They want the province to take a stronger stance against anti-Muslim actions and rhetoric.

‘Out of touch’

Ihsaan Gardee, executive director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims, said Legault’s initial comments were “clearly out of touch with the realities of Islamophobia on the ground in Quebec.”

​Karim Elabed, an imam at a mosque in Lévis, a small city across the river from Quebec City, said the premier’s comments were irresponsible.

“The general opinion is that there is no problem in Quebec. But the problem is real,” he said.

The province should be striving toward educating the future generations and teaching youth to accept cultural differences, said Elabed.

Liberal MP Gaétan Barrette also said Legault’s comments were out of touch with reality, though he too cautioned the problem isn’t “systemic” in Quebec.

“I’m not saying that society is Islamophobic. I say there are people, no doubt, who are,” he said.

At the federal level, the Commons heritage committee recommended last year that Jan. 29 be declared a “national day of remembrance and action on Islamophobia and other forms of religious discrimination.”

Toronto Mayor John Tory announced this week that the city was proclaiming Jan. 29 a day of remembrance and action on Islamophobia.

Like the ruling Coalition Avenir Québec, Quebec’s previous Liberal government also rejected the idea of setting aside a day against Islamophobia.

Former premier Philippe Couillard said last year he preferred to make a commitment against racism and discrimination, rather than single out a particular group or religion.

The latest controversy comes amid a renewed focus on the province’s longstanding debate over the accommodation of religious minorities.

Legault has promised legislation early this year blocking public servants in positions of authority, including police officers, judges, prosecutors, prison guards and teachers, from wearing religious symbols at work.

Source: As controversy swirls, François Legault concedes Islamophobia exists in Quebec

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Il n’y a pas d’islamophobie au Québec, affirme François Legault

2019/02/01 1 Comment

One thing not to support a commemorative day, another to deny that there is no Islamophobia or anti-Muslim attitudes in Quebec (especially when planned legislation is targeted at Muslims):

Après deux jours de réflexion, Québec ferme finalement catégoriquement la porte à ce que le 29 janvier – journée de commémoration de la tuerie à la mosquée de Québec, en 2017 – soit déclaré journée nationale contre l’islamophobie.

«Je ne pense pas qu’il y ait de l’islamophobie au Québec, je ne vois donc pas pourquoi il y aura une journée [qui y soit] consacrée», a tranché d’un ton sans appel le premier ministre François Legault, jeudi.

«Geneviève [Guilbault] a été prudente en disant qu’on allait regarder ça. On l’a regardé, y’en aura pas. C’est clair», a-t-il aussi affirmé.

Mardi, lors d’une réunion du conseil des ministres à Gatineau, la ministre de la Sécurité publique et vice-première ministre du Québec, Geneviève Guilbault, avait pourtant ouvert la porte à l’instauration d’une telle journée.

«C’est une discussion qu’on peut avoir», avait-elle brièvement dit, avant d’ajouter qu’elle était récemment présente à «un événement organisé par Louis Garneau pour avoir une journée nationale contre les textos au volant. Je trouve que c’est dans le même esprit d’essayer d’instituer cette pensée-là, cette mémoire-là.»

Le maire de Toronto a pour sa part déclaré cette semaine que le 29 janvier sera désormais désigné dans sa ville comme un «Jour de mémoire et d’action contre l’islamophobie» pour souligner la tuerie qui a frappé la mosquée de Québec en 2017.

Source: Il n’y a pas d’islamophobie au Québec, affirme François Legault

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Chris Selley: It’s gut-check time for secularists as Quebec counts people affected by religious symbols ban

2019/01/31 Leave a comment

Good column by Selley on just how unworkable this will be when it comes down to lists with names:

The latest drama surrounding Quebec’s efforts to cleanse parts of the civil service of ostentatious religious symbols — read: hijabs — concerns a fairly anodyne request for information: On Monday, La Presse reported that the provincial Ministry of Education had asked three Montreal-area school boards for statistics on the number of teachers and other employees who would be affected by such a prohibition. But much consternation ensued.

Catherine Harel-Bourdon, president of the Montreal board, called the request “aberrant,” suggested it ran afoul of Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, and insisted no such information would be forthcoming. Liberal education critic Marwah Rizqy likened the request to “profiling.” “Counting religious symbols in schools — that’s the government’s priority on education?” asked Québec solidaire MNA and spokeswoman Manon Massé on Twitter. “That’s how it’s going to offer a better public education system?” (You’ll note she didn’t actually criticize the idea itself.)

When La Presse later reported that “not one, but three ministries” had made such requests of relevant authority-wielding workforces — police officers, judges, Crown attorneys and prison guards — the blowback only intensified. Even nationalist commentator Denise Bombardier, who supports the ban, called it a “blunder” that “offers weapons on a silver platter to political enemies who are champing at the bit … to fight with (Premier François Legault).” (He wants to abolish school boards altogether.)

“This … unacceptable intervention puts the government on the defensive before the parliamentary session even begins,” Bombardier complained.

All this over counting the number of people to be affected by a proposed government policy?

A valid criticism would be that only now, after 125 years of debate — or maybe it just feels that long — is anyone thinking to try to quantify the supposed problem that every party in the National Assembly has promised to address. Those who support the ban most fervently might credibly protest that the numbers are irrelevant: However many teachers, police officers and Crown attorneys there are who refuse to remove their religious symbols at work, that’s how many need to be removed from their jobs. (Bonus: Job opportunities for Proper Quebecers!) They see the CAQ government’s census as a sign it’s going soft and planning to adopt a “grandfather clause” that would exempt existing employees from the new restrictions — another very valid criticism, no matter what your position on the government’s policy.

“Grandmother clause” would be a better thing to call it. (“We should make clear that the bill is aimed primarily, if not exclusively, at veiled women,” Bombardier wrote this week in Le Journal de Montréal. If only Quebec’s politicians were as honest.)

“Cowardice clause” would be even more apt. The political advantage is that no one would have to be seen losing her job — something of which polls consistently show Quebecers are leery, even if they support the restrictions in principle. But that’s just staggeringly disreputable: If this version of laïcité — the kind that, inter alia, keeps a crucifix hanging above the speaker’s chair in the National Assembly — is a social imperative, then why delay? Telling a Muslim girl she can’t be a teacher or a police officer because she was born too late might make less news than canning her mom, but it’s no less an affront to Quebecers’ basic freedoms.

Indeed, many still grapple with the most basic implications of laïcité — among them Vincent Marissal, until recently one of Quebec’s more perspicacious journalists and now a Québec solidaire MNA. He says he supports the 2008 recommendations of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission, which are basically identical to what Legault proposes except they didn’t implicate teachers. And yet here he is this week,  speaking with La Presse: “Am I comfortable with the fact that someone won’t be able to do a job because of (the new law)? The frank answer is no, I’m not comfortable with that.”

He shares that cognitive dissonance with many bien-pensant Quebecers. But for the love of Bonhomme, they’ve had more than a decade to square that circle — more than long enough, surely, to realize it simply can’t be done. If you don’t support telling certain Quebecers they can’t hold certain jobs in the public service — now and in the future — then you do not, in fact, support the Bouchard-Taylor recommendations, and you do not, in fact, support the CAQ government’s Bouchard-Taylor-Plus proposal.

This isn’t a video-game simulation of Quebec society. Real people’s lives and livelihoods are on the table. At some point, if Premier Legault is to effect his more perfect Quebec society, the lists that are making people squeamish this week will have to be prepared: names, positions, salaries, offending religious symbols, termination dates. Quebecers who support these restrictions on religious liberty but aren’t sure they should affect real live human beings need to imagine themselves reading those lists, and then check their guts.

Source: Chris Selley: It’s gut-check time for secularists as Quebec counts people affected by religious symbols ban

Some of the dynamics can be seen in the following two articles from the Quebec media:

Source: Signes religieux: douloureuse remise en question au PLQ

Source: Signes religieux: la CAQ divisée sur «la clause grand-père»

 

 

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

School boards push back on ‘witch hunt’ as government seeks data on staff religious symbols

2019/01/29 Leave a comment

Very intrusive vs the self-declaration approach of the census and employment equity (which do not capture the degrees of religiosity in the census or religious minority status in EE). The 2011 NHS provided the following numbers for Quebec education Muslim employees (not only teachers) – 2.3% in schools, 1.9 % in CEGEPs, 5.3% in universities:

The head of Quebec’s largest school board says she was outraged by a request from the province’s Education Department last week seeking to know how many board employees wear religious symbols.

Catherine Harel Bourdon, who oversees the Commission scolaire de Montreal, says the request received Friday could be seen as contravening the rights and freedoms of its employees.

Harel Bourdon says the board was not told why the department was seeking such information. She said the board’s response was that it does not collect such information and would not engage in what she called a witch hunt.

The controversy comes as the new Coalition Avenir Quebec government prepares legislation that would prohibit public servants in positions of authority — including teachers — from wearing religious symbols such as the hijab, kippa or turban at work.

Francis Bouchard, a spokesman for Education Minister Jean-Francois Roberge, says no formal request for a tally was made — rather a number of school boards were called to determine whether such information exists. Bouchard accused the boards of manufacturing a scandal.

Relations were already strained between the province’s school boards and the new government, which was elected on a promise to eliminate the boards in favour of new service centres.

Source: School boards push back on ‘witch hunt’ as government seeks data on staff religious symbols

More extensive reporting in French:

Le ministère de l’Éducation a causé toute une commotion en demandant à des commissions scolaires de dénombrer les enseignants et les membres de la direction des écoles qui portent un signe religieux au travail, a appris La Presse.

Leur fédération s’est aussitôt rebiffée, mandatant ses services juridiques de vérifier la légalité d’une telle manoeuvre, selon un courriel envoyé à tous ses membres.

Des sources sûres indiquent qu’au moins trois commissions scolaires de la région métropolitaine ont reçu une demande du Ministère visant à divulguer des statistiques sur le port de signes religieux. Il s’agit des commissions scolaires de Montréal (CSDM), de la Pointe-de-l’Île (CSPI) et de Laval (CSDL).

Malaise

La demande aurait été faite verbalement, et non par écrit, vendredi dernier. Le ressac a été immédiat. Les commissions scolaires visées ont exprimé leur malaise devant une telle demande.

La Fédération des commissions scolaires du Québec (FCSQ) s’est mêlée du dossier, selon un courriel envoyé à l’ensemble de ses membres. « Certaines commissions scolaires ont reçu une demande du bureau de la sous-ministre de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur pour dénombrer le personnel des commissions scolaires et des écoles qui portent des signes religieux au travail », peut-on lire.

« Dans l’éventualité où vous auriez reçu une demande semblable, nous vous prions de nous en informer dans les plus brefs délais. »

La FCSQ suggère de ne pas répondre au Ministère pour le moment, toujours selon ce courriel. « Nos services juridiques évaluent présentement cette demande. Des instructions supplémentaires vous seront transmises le plus rapidement possible », écrit la fédération.

« Aberrant ! »

La présidente de la CSDM, Catherine Harel Bourdon, confirme que le Ministère a demandé des statistiques sur le nombre d’employés portant des signes religieux. On lui a répondu que de telles statistiques n’existent pas et ne seraient pas produites non plus. « J’ai trouvé ça aberrant ! », a lancé Mme Harel Bourdon en entrevue. Une commission scolaire qui ferait un tel dénombrement irait à l’encontre de la Charte québécoise des droits et libertés de la personne, selon elle.

« Ça fait plusieurs mois que des journalistes me demandent combien il y en a. Ce que j’ai toujours répondu, c’est que nous, quand on fait des embauches, autant de nouvelles embauches qu’au niveau de notre personnel qui est déjà à notre emploi, on ne demande pas s’ils portent des signes religieux », a-t-elle affirmé.

« Je verrais mal un employeur faire une demande comme ça. »

L’article 18.1 de la Charte stipule que « nul ne peut, dans un formulaire de demande d’emploi ou lors d’une entrevue relative à un emploi, requérir d’une personne des renseignements » relatifs, entre autres, à sa religion.

Certes, il existe des statistiques, par exemple, sur la proportion d’employés du secteur public qui appartiennent à une minorité visible. Mais elles sont le résultat d’un exercice encadré par la Charte. Il s’agit du programme d’accès à l’égalité en emploi. À cette fin bien précise, tous les employés sont appelés, de façon volontaire, à remplir un questionnaire et à déclarer s’ils sont membres d’une minorité visible. La démarche du ministère de l’Éducation ne se fait pas dans ce cadre. Il n’est jamais question de port de signes religieux dans ces questionnaires.

Toutes les sources consultées font un lien entre la demande du Ministère et la volonté du gouvernement d’interdire le port de signes religieux chez les enseignants (mais aussi chez les représentants de l’État dotés d’un pouvoir de coercition : juges, procureurs de la Couronne, policiers et gardiens de prison).

Le premier ministre François Legault affirmait avant les Fêtes qu’il n’y aurait pas de clause de droits acquis pour les employés actuels, communément appelée clause grand-père. Pour éviter des congédiements, Québec a évoqué l’idée de déplacer les récalcitrants à d’autres fonctions. Un projet de loi est attendu bientôt.

Du « profilage » ?

Pour la porte-parole du Parti libéral en matière d’éducation, Marwah Rizqy, la demande du Ministère revient à faire du « profilage ». « Une fois qu’on a répertorié le nombre, c’est quoi, la suite des choses ? Est-ce que c’est pour venir en quelque sorte banaliser en disant : “Écoutez, ça ne touche pas tant de monde que ça ?” Et si c’est ça, l’objectif, est-ce qu’il est aussi en train de nous dire que les droits fondamentaux, si vous êtes un petit nombre, vous n’en avez pas ? C’est de l’improvisation. »

Le gouvernement Marois, qui voulait interdire aux employés de l’État de porter des signes religieux, n’avait pas demandé un dénombrement aux commissions scolaires, a confirmé une source impliquée dans le dossier à l’époque. Elle est surprise de la démarche faite par le ministère de l’Éducation.

Le cabinet du ministre de l’Éducation, Jean-François Roberge, n’a pas donné de réponses aux questions que La Presse lui a posées hier.

***

LES COMMISSIONS SCOLAIRES VISÉES PAR LA DEMANDE DE QUÉBEC

Commission scolaire de Montréal

– Plus de 8200 enseignants

– 127 écoles primaires

– 26 écoles secondaires

Commission scolaire de la Pointe-de-l’Île

– Plus de 4300 enseignants

– 40 écoles primaires

– 7 écoles secondaires

Commission scolaire de Laval

– Plus de 5000 enseignants

– 56 écoles primaires

– 14 écoles secondaires

Source: Signes religieux chez les enseignants: Québec veut des chiffres

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Laïcité: des professeurs se posent en censeurs

2019/01/26 Leave a comment

Group think without allowing for discussion of other perspectives. And it should be possible to have respectful discussion of different perspectives:

À quelques semaines du dépôt probable d’un projet de loi sur les signes religieux, la laïcité reste un sujet « explosif » qui divise profondément les enseignants. La professeure Nadia El-Mabrouk, bien connue pour son opposition au port de signes religieux, a été bannie d’un colloque syndical auquel elle avait pourtant été invitée à livrer son point de vue.

Selon ce que Le Devoir a appris, la direction de l’Alliance des professeures et professeurs de Montréal a annulé l’invitation faite à Mme El-Mabrouk après l’éclatement d’une controverse chez les enseignants. La simple présence prévue de la professeure de l’Université de Montréal au colloque de l’Alliance a provoqué un « malaise » au sein de la profession, et même des « commentaires violents » dans un groupe de discussion Facebook.

L’assemblée des délégués du syndicat a voté à la majorité l’annulation de la conférence de Nadia El-Mabrouk sur la laïcité au colloque de l’Alliance, prévu les 18 et 19 février 2019. La professeure a aussi été bannie d’une table ronde sur le féminisme où elle devait prendre part avec la journaliste Pascale Navarro.

Ce colloque, qui célébrera le 100e anniversaire de l’Alliance des professeurs, doit regrouper une quarantaine de conférenciers de renom, dont Françoise David et le Dr Jean-François Chicoine. Ils aborderont une série de thèmes plutôt consensuels, comme l’école de demain, la gestion de classe, les jeux vidéo, le déficit d’attention, et ainsi de suite.

Les deux événements auxquels devait participer Nadia El-Mabrouk ont cependant mis le feu aux poudres. Cette expulsion de la conférencière sur fond de désaccord idéologique soulève la grogne au sein de l’Alliance. Des enseignants dénoncent cette « censure » digne des curés du siècle dernier. D’autres se réjouissent de ne pas être exposés à des idées contraires aux positions officielles du syndicat.

Des sujets « assez sensibles »

« Je vous écris pour vous faire part du malaise que certains profs ont ressenti en recevant le programme du colloque, hier matin, dans leur milieu. En effet, dans le résumé de votre conférence, il est question de sujets assez sensibles chez les profs ; port de signes religieux, cours d’ECR [éthique et culture religieuse], cours à la sexualité, bref, tout cela est assez explosif en ce moment. Nous n’avions évidemment pas prévu que la CAQ serait portée au pouvoir au moment où nous vous avons demandé votre intérêt à participer à ce colloque », indique l’Alliance dans un courriel à Nadia El-Mabrouk daté du 11 décembre 2018.

La présence de la professeure au colloque a été annulée le soir même par l’assemblée des délégués. Le conseil d’administration du syndicat s’est plié à la décision des délégués, même s’il avait recommandé de maintenir la conférence et la table ronde où Nadia El-Mabrouk était invitée.

« Le conseil d’administration a expliqué que cette personne-là avait été choisie même si elle n’avait pas nécessairement les mêmes opinions et orientations que notre organisation syndicale », explique Catherine Renaud, présidente de l’Alliance.

« On n’est pas toujours obligés d’entendre des gens qui pensent comme nous. Ça permet d’échanger et de faire progresser notre réflexion, ajoute-t-elle. On n’a jamais l’unanimité sur des sujets comme ça qui sont polarisants. Il y a des pour et des contre, et pour certains, c’est viscéral. Ce n’est pas différent de ce que pense la population de ces enjeux-là. »

Les syndicats d’enseignants, dont l’Alliance, s’opposent officiellement à l’interdiction du port de signes religieux que le gouvernement Legault a promis d’étendre à la profession enseignante. « On ne veut surtout pas que ces personnes-là soient congédiées non plus », précise Catherine Renaud.

« Censure » syndicale

Luc Charlebois, enseignant de francisation à l’école secondaire Louis-Riel, dans l’est de Montréal, est fâché. Il s’insurge contre ce qu’il considère comme de la « censure ». « La proposition [de retirer l’invitation à la professeure El-Mabrouk] a été amenée sur le plancher à la dernière minute, sans consultation des membres. Il y a un gros problème de démocratie syndicale », dit-il.

La professeure a été officiellement mise au ban à cause de ses positions sur l’identité des genres. Dans une chronique dans La Presse +, elle a déjà dit craindre que les cours d’éducation à la sexualité enseignent « l’idéologie queer ». Elle estime que ce phénomène devient une véritable « religion ». Elle déplore que cette seule mise en garde lui vaille d’être traitée de transphobe.

« Une accusation de transphobie, c’est une attaque à ma réputation. Ces gens n’ont sûrement pas lu mes articles », dit Nadia El-Mabrouk au Devoir.

« La vérité, c’est qu’on me censure. Si ma vie n’est pas en danger en allant au colloque, il n’y a pas de problème à ce que j’y sois. Il y a un débat sur la laïcité qui s’en vient [avec le dépôt promis du projet de loi du gouvernement Legault], et là, on est en train de faire de l’intimidation. Les gens n’osent pas s’exprimer sur les signes religieux par crainte d’être taxés de racisme », dit la professeure d’informatique.

Source: Laïcité: des professeurs se posent en censeurs

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Tory leader Andrew Scheer promises more autonomy for Quebec on immigration, Coyne comments

2019/01/23 Leave a comment

As Coyne notes (Andrew Coyne: Shameless bidding war for Quebec votes is only going to get worse), the bidding war begins:

Quebec will be given more autonomy over immigration if the federal Conservatives win October’s election, party leader Andrew Scheer promised Monday. But he wouldn’t say whether he agrees that Quebec alone should determine how many immigrants it receives.

Premier Francois Legault campaigned on a promise to temporarily reduce annual immigration to Quebec, beginning this year. But almost one month into the new year, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — an advocate of increased immigration to Canada — hasn’t said whether his Liberal government will help Quebec reach its goal.

Trudeau has said he is willing to continue discussions with Legault over his immigration demands, but he stresses his priority is to ensure Quebec has enough workers to fill widespread labour shortages across the province.

Speaking in Montreal at the end of a months-long consultation aimed at courting Quebec voters, Scheer promised “to ensure that Quebec has more autonomy” over immigration.

“Trudeau has had months to do something about (immigration), and what I’m saying is that come October, when I sit down with Mr. Legault, we will actually have actions and not just words, and not just meetings for the sake of meetings,” Scheer told reporters.

Legault says he’s concerned too many immigrants fail to learn French or leave the province soon after arriving. The premier, elected Oct. 1, wants to reduce immigration to address those issues.

Immigration has become a particularly sensitive topic in Quebec since 2017, when an influx of asylum seekers entering the province illegally from the United States began. Last year alone, 18,518 out of 19,419 — or 95 per cent — of RCMP interceptions of migrants crossing between official ports of entry occurred in Quebec.

Scheer said Canadians’ concerns over immigration “stem from the fact this government has completely lost control of the immigration file. We see a situation in Quebec where over 30,000 people have entered Canada illegally and the government — Justin Trudeau — has literally done nothing to stop that.”

Quebec controls roughly 70 per cent of immigrants who settle in the province every year, all in the economic migrant category. The remaining 30 per cent arrive through the family re-unification system or as refugees, two categories controlled by the federal government. Legault has stated he wants to reduce by 20 per cent the number of immigrants in all three categories.

Scheer on Monday declined to say whether he thinks Quebec should control all three categories of immigrants to the province. “I think if you have the right approach … you don’t need to have one party and one level dictating to the other. You work together in collaboration, understanding that Quebec has specific challenges, specific needs.”

Federal Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc said last week he and other federal ministers will soon be meeting with their Quebec counterparts to discuss Legault’s plan to reduce immigration. But LeBlanc said that discussion will have to be “in the context of a broader discussion around labour shortages and … around asylum seekers and the appropriate compensation that the government of Quebec requires.”

The Conservatives sense an opening in the province due to turmoil inside the Bloc Quebecois. The sovereigntist party that once dominated federal politics in the province has been reduced to 10 MPs and last week elected a new leader, Yves-Francois Blanchet, by acclamation.

Last March, Scheer wrote an open letter to Quebecers in La Presse inviting people upset with the “incompetence” of Trudeau and tired of the “existential crises” of the Bloc to come over to his party. An aide said Monday Scheer is taking French lessons, and the Tory leader’s increased ease with the language was noticeable at the news conference.

Aside from promising more autonomy over immigration, Scheer said a Tory government would agree to Legault’s demand that Quebecers file a single tax return to be overseen by the Quebec government.

The Tory leader also promised to “offer incentives” to retirees who want to re-enter the work force, in order to help alleviate labour shortages. And he said a Conservative government would invest in infrastructure to prevent wastewater discharges into the St. Lawrence River and appoint a federal minister from Quebec to oversee economic development in the province.

Later on Monday Scheer was scheduled to attend an event at the campaign office for his candidate, Jasmine Louras, who is vying to replace former NDP leader Tom Mulcair in a Feb. 25 byelection in the Montreal riding of Outremont.

Source: Tory leader Andrew Scheer promises more autonomy for Quebec on immigration

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Trudeau offers to work with Legault on a temporary reduction in immigration levels

2019/01/19 Leave a comment

My sympathy for additional funding for asylum seekers is tempered by the fact that the current Canada-Quebec agreement means a further increase despite the drop:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau demonstrated a new willingness to help Quebec Premier François Legault temporarily reduce immigration to the province by more than 20 per cent, even as Ottawa promotes higher immigration as the key to a stronger economy.

Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Legault discussed immigration issues Thursday during a private meeting in Sherbrooke, Que., where the federal Liberal cabinet is meeting for a three-day retreat.

Ottawa’s readiness to work with Quebec on its lower targets marks a change in tone for Mr. Trudeau, who had criticized the idea last month.

The two governments agreed that senior ministers will meet later this month in Gatineau to work out a plan. The discussions will also aim to reach a deal on compensating Quebec for its costs related to settling refugee claimants who have crossed into the province from the United States between official points of entry.

More than 90 per cent of the thousands of people who have crossed into Canada between official points of entry over the past two years have done so at Roxham Road in southwestern Quebec near Champlain, N.Y.

The Quebec government is seeking $300-million in compensation from Ottawa, but Mr. Legault said Ottawa is only offering to cover $140-million.

Federal Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc, who was in Thursday’s meeting with Mr. Legault, told reporters that reducing immigration at a time when many Quebec businesses are facing severe labour shortages will be a challenge.

“Squaring that circle isn’t going to be easy,” he said. “We recognize that the Quebec government made a commitment in their election to temporarily reduce immigration levels in Quebec. Immigration in Quebec is a shared jurisdiction. It’s not like in my province of New Brunswick. There is a long-standing agreement that we want to respect between Canada and Quebec.”

Under the terms of a 1991 Canada-Quebec deal on immigration, federal funding to help Quebec integrate immigrants will rise even as the province’s total intake of immigrants declines.

The federal government announced in November that it will gradually raise Canada’s national targets for annual immigration to 350,000 in 2021, from 310,000 this year. It is not clear how Quebec’s reductions will affect Ottawa’s national targets.

Mr. Trudeau did not speak with reporters after meeting with Mr. Legault, but the Premier confirmed that further discussions on immigration will take place soon in Gatineau.

“He didn’t say no,” Mr. Legault said following his meeting with the Prime Minister, in reference to his list of demands related to immigration. “He said he was thinking about it. What we want is before bringing the targets back up in the next few years, that we put in place a French test and a values test.”

Federal Liberals are in Quebec this week to build support ahead of the October federal election. Polls suggest the Liberal Party could pick up seats in the province, which could help offset potential losses in other parts of the country.

Several ministers, including Mr. LeBlanc and Infrastructure Minister François-Philippe Champagne, recently toured parts of Quebec to meet with business leaders ahead of the cabinet retreat. They said the clear message is that skills shortages are a major problem.

“Businesses in Drummondville earlier this week told me they’re literally refusing contracts and not accepting sales because they do not have enough employees to properly complete the contract,” said Mr. LeBlanc. “So you can imagine the multiplier effect of that over time, on the economic growth in Quebec, which frankly is something that’s very important for the whole country.”

Mr. Legault said the temporary reduction in immigration – which would apply equally to three categories: economic immigrants, family reunification and refugees – will give Quebec time to ensure that it is bringing in people with the right skills. He also said Quebec wants to ensure its immigrants can speak French and support Quebec values.

Quebec announced in December that it will reduce the number of newcomers to 40,000 in 2019, a 24-per-cent reduction from 2018 levels.

Advocates for immigrants and refugees have called Quebec’s plan cruel. Mr. LeBlanc said last month that Ottawa was “disappointed” by Quebec’s new targets.

Source: Trudeau offers to work with Legault on a temporary reduction in immigration levels

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Kurl: Quebec’s – and Canada’s – tolerance for religious symbols remains selective

2018/12/10 Leave a comment

Useful reminder:

As battle lines are drawn over the Coalition Avenir Quebec’s promised ban on public servants wearing religious garments or articles at work, it’s instructive to separate generalities from specifics.

When Quebecers are asked general questions such as “do you support a ban” on public employees in positions of authority wearing religious symbols at work, two-thirds say yes. But when asked specifically which symbols would be unacceptable for said public employees at work, it appears what they’re really saying is they support a ban on non-Judeo-Christian symbols.

This is a key distinction, because some observers take this majority support on the general question as a sign the province – and the rest of the country – is becoming more secular. Indeed, Quebec Premier François Legault himself wraps his plans in words such as “secularism” and “neutrality.” Public sentiment, however, is anything but “neutral.”

While most Quebec residents support the provincial government’s proposal overall, our polling data also show that majorities believe public employees should be allowed to wear a crucifix or a Star of David on the job (73 per cent and 68 per cent, respectively). Indeed, polling further indicates Quebecers are nearly twice as likely to want to see the crucifix in Quebec’s National Assembly stay put as to see it removed.

Quebecers aren’t alone in this thinking. Majorities in all other provinces are also more amenable to the display of Judeo-Christian symbols in the workplace. But where the province differs from the rest of the country is that while more than half say “non” to public servants wearing the Muslim hijab (57 per cent) and the Sikh turban (55 per cent), majorities in the rest of the country (between 70 and 80 per cent, depending on the province) have little issue with it.

These general opinion trends aren’t new. But Legault now represents the fourth premier (the CAQ the third governing political party) to try such a moratorium. Beyond legal challenges, there’s a reason his predecessors, while never explicitly abandoning the idea, also never quite got around to making it happen.

In a province where Catholic nuns have a centuries-old tradition in health care, is any political party in Quebec willing to apply its own ban evenly and tell them they can no longer provide comfort to hospital patients while in habit? In a province where the first Jewish synagogue was established in the 1760s, will this government politically survive telling a public school teacher to remove his kippah?

Meanwhile, it’s not like the rest of the country is completely tolerant of minority religious symbols. If there is something that “unifies” people across Canada, it is opposition to and discomfort with three specific articles of faith identified with the Sikh and Muslim religions. Regardless of where people live, most don’t think the burqa and the niqab – worn by some Muslim women – or the kirpan, the ceremonial dagger worn by some Orthodox Sikhs, should be worn by public servants in their own provinces.

Many would use these general opinions towards a religious symbol ban as evidence Canada is becoming more hostile to religion. But in fact, more people are inclined to see the general role and contributions of religious and faith groups to Canadian society as good than bad. Instead, the sobering reality is this hostility is reserved for some garments and symbols associated with specific religions.

In a country that often prides itself on acceptance of different cultures and ways of life, this can seem depressing. But a silver lining could exist in the views of the next generation. Times change. Nearly three decades ago, this country was gripped by a divisive debate over whether turbaned Sikhs should be able to serve in the RCMP and armed forces. Today that debate is over. And today, it is younger people – both in and outside Quebec – who are more permissive towards all articles of faith being worn in public workplaces. For more than a decade, a province and a country has exhausted itself talking about these issues. Maybe, a generation from now, the debate will be over.

Source: Kurl: Quebec’s – and Canada’s – tolerance for religious symbols remains selective

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with , ,

As Quebec cuts immigration, statistics foreshadow demographic crunch

2018/12/07 Leave a comment

Good overview of the numbers:

As Premier François Legault prepares to cut immigrationby about 20 per cent, new statistics indicate Quebec has the oldest inhabitants in Canada and its overall population is growing at a slower pace than most other provinces.

The figures may lend credence to critics of the Coalition Avenir Québec plan, including the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal and Quebec’s largest employer group, who say cutting immigration could exacerbate a demographic and labour crunch.

Quebec will cut the number of new arrivals by more than 10,000 a year — from 53,300 in 2018 to between 38,000 and 42,000 in 2019. There is no indication when or if the number will be raised in the future.

On Thursday, the Institut de la statistique du Québec published its annual demographic update — a snapshot of Quebec as of Jan. 1, 2018. Here’s some of what it revealed:

8.3 million

Quebec’s population in 2017. It grew by 85,700, or one per cent. That’s a growth rate of 10.3 per 1,000 people, which is lower than the provincial average (13 per 1,000). Only New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nova Scotia had lower growth rates than Quebec. Ontario registered the biggest increase: 15.6 per 1,000.

22.6

Percentage of Canadians who live in Quebec. That figure has remained steady in recent years. But since the early 1970s, Quebec’s proportion of Canada’s population has fallen by more than five percentage points (from 27.9 per cent in 1971). Meanwhile, Alberta’s has increased by four points and Ontario’s has jumped by three points. The Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal has urged Quebec to increase immigration to 60,000 per year in part to maintain the province’s demographic weight. A further drop in Quebec’s weight could mean less political clout within Canada when new seats are added to the House of Commons.

18.5

Percentage of Quebec’s population 65 or older. Across Canada, the average is lower – 17 per cent. In addition to having more older inhabitants, Quebec also has fewer residents 20 or younger (20.6 per cent, compared to 21.6 per cent across Canada).

83,900

Number of babies born in Quebec in 2017. That’s 2,400 fewer than in 2016. Quebec’s fertility rate was 1.54 children per woman, slightly more than the Canadian average of 1.49. Quebec was in the middle of the pack — five provinces had lower rates and four have higher rates.

32

Percentage of babies born in Quebec last year who have at least one parent born outside Canada. In most of these cases, both parents were born elsewhere. This trend has grown steadily in recent years. In 1980, 13 per cent of babies had at least one foreign-born parent. By 2000, the figure had jumped to 21 per cent.

52,407

Number of immigrants who arrived in Quebec in 2017. That’s a decrease of 850 compared to the previous year. Quebec welcomed 18 per cent of the immigrants who came to Canada, less than its demographic weight (it has just under 23 per cent of Canada’s population). Quebec took in 6.3 immigrants for every 1,000 current residents. That’s lower than the Canadian average (8.3 per 1,000) but higher than the United States (3.5 per 1,000). Almost 60 per cent of Quebec’s new immigrants were in the 20-to-44 age group. Seventy-three per cent of immigrants who arrived in Quebec in 2015 still lived in the province in 2017.

5,108

Number of immigrants who came to Quebec from China, the single biggest source of newcomers in 2017. They represented 10 per cent of new immigrants. In second and third spot: France (8.6 per cent) and Syria (seven per cent). The previous year, the order was: Syria, France, China.

22,232

Number of Canadians from other provinces who moved to Quebec. That’s the highest number in more than a decade. The surge helped reduce the net outflow of residents to other provinces. In total, 6,500 more people left Quebec for other parts of Canada last year than arrived in Quebec from other provinces. That’s the smallest interprovincial population loss since 2011. Most between-province moves involve the 401. In 2017, 12,500 Ontario residents moved to Quebec, while almost 19,000 Quebecers relocated to Ontario.

Source: As Quebec cuts immigration, statistics foreshadow demographic crunch

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

MP’s bid to boost French requirements for citizenship could spark House battle

2018/12/06 Leave a comment

Citizenship is solely federal jurisdiction:

Heads up, House staff: It may be time to dust off those ballot boxes.

Another battle over backbench business may be brewing after the Commons procedure committee backed a recommendation to bar Bloc Québécois interim leader Mario Beaulieu’s bid to impose new French-language requirements on Quebec residents applying for Canadian citizenship from going to a full House vote.

Introduced on Nov. 1, Beaulieu’s bill would require permanent residents living in Quebec to have an “adequate knowledge of French” in order to obtain Canadian citizenship.

Under the current laws, they only need an “adequate knowledge” of one of Canada’s two official language, a standard that applies across the country — prompting concerns that Beaulieu’s proposal could violate the Constitution.

Last month, the all-party subcommittee charged with vetting private members’ bills and motions in advance of their addition to the House priority list recommended that the proposal be designated non-votable — while Beaulieu would remain free to bring it to the floor for debate. But when the two hours automatically allocated for second-reading consideration ran out, it would be dropped from the order paper.

During the subcommittee meeting, Library of Parliament analyst David Groves told MPs it raised “complex constitutional issues” — but could nevertheless be permitted to go forward without being designed as non-votable, since Quebec has “a great deal more control over immigration than other provinces,” and, as a result, “has some unique powers in that regard.”

The three subcommittee members weren’t so sure.

“My wife speaks five languages. French is not one of them,” Liberal MP David de Burgh Graham said. “When she got her Canadian citizenship, we had just moved to Quebec” — where, he noted, he already lived. “She would have had to return to Ontario or stay in Ontario to get her citizenship, and I think that’s against the values of our Constitution, our charter.”

New Democrat MP Rachel Blaney agreed.

“As a person who ran an organization that served newcomers to Canada for many years, I remember helping people in our very anglophone part of the world, in B.C., who spoke only French, and they would still be able to get their citizenship by using the French language,” she observed.

“I am not going to vote in support of moving forward with this, because it simply is not … well, I don’t think it’s constitutional, and it totally undermines the fact that Canada is a multilingual country. That’s something we should all be proud of.”

Eventually, the subcommittee voted unanimously to recommend the bill be designated non-votable — a decision that prompted Beaulieu to exercise his right to appeal, which he did during a special appearance before the full committee last week.

But despite garnering support from the opposition side of the table for his pitch to let his bill proceed to a vote, Liberal MPs used their majority to side with the subcommittee and approve the recommended course of action, although Liberal MP Scott Simms noted that his vote was cast “with reservations.”

Beaulieu does have one remaining avenue of appeal: If he can secure the support of at least five fellow MPs representing at least two recognized parties, he can ask the Speaker to convene a secret ballot vote on the committee ruling.

That’s exactly what New Democrat MP Sheila Malcolmson did last year when the same subcommittee concluded that her proposal to establish a federal strategy on cleaning up shipwrecks and abandoned vessels was simply too similar to a government-backed bill introduced after her proposal was tabled.

The House ultimately rejected her call, which she blamed on the Liberal government for telling its MPs to block her attempt to revive the bill.

Even if Beaulieu succeeds in getting his bill back on the main House docket, he’ll still face an uphill battle in convincing his Commons colleagues to actually vote for his proposed new rules for hopeful citizens. That’s because the opposition members who supported his right to bring it forward at committee made it very clear they’d be unlikely to support it in the House.

Source: MP’s bid to boost French requirements for citizenship could spark House battle

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →