Forty years of Bill 101

Bill 101, the Charter of the French Language, was adopted forty years ago this coming Saturday. It remains the focus of intense debate; its effects and the value of its contribution to modern Quebec society are contested.

Was Bill 101 necessary for the survival of the French-language in Quebec?

Or is it an unnecessary and pernicious law that has diminished basic human and minority rights?

Is it a quasi-constitutional law that should not only remain in force but be strengthened? Or a law that should be abolished? Is Bill 101 critical for modern Quebec or a hindrance?

Within the past weeks, the PQ has called for a “Bill 202,” while the young provincial Liberals debated relaxing linguistic educational restrictions.

Linguistic debates are, of course, intensely personal in Quebec. Anecdote, personal experience, linguistic and ethnic origins, political outlook, education and social class alongside a multitude of personal factors influence our perceptions of the law.

What are the ways in which we can qualitatively and quantitatively measure the ways in which Bill 101 has affected Quebec society?

The meaning: What is “Bill 101”? The reference is to an act of legislation, the Charter of the French Language of Quebec, a law and not a bill which is proposed legislation before official adoption.

However, Bill 101 or ‘loi 101’ is more commonly a metonym, a figure of speech for a broader concept. The meaning and significance is far greater that the banal and often perplexing wording and accompanying regulations of the law itself, but a reference to language politics and linguistic public policy in the province of Quebec following the election of the PQ in 1976.

A broad attribution of social, economic, demographic and linguistic phenomena are attributed to the law.

It has been heralded as the sentinel protecting the French language from the onslaught of foreign and domestic nonfrancophones, and is viewed by others, particularly in the English-speaking community, as the cause of all ills that afflict their community.

Can these contradictory perceptions be dissected into a somewhat objective assessment of the law and its effect of society?

Can we differentiate between our political opinions on Quebec nationalism, separatism and federalism from these linguistic policies?

What can be correlated directly to the law and accompanying policies and what can be uncoupled?

The legislation: The law itself has 214 articles within, addressing a variety of topics: the ‘official’ language, fundamental language rights, language of the courts, civil administration, parapublic agencies, labour, commerce and business, instruction (ie. education), post-secondary education, toponymy, francisization, establishing the OQLF and the Conseil superier de la langue francaise.

The law has been modified over time by successive governments, generally in response to a court ruling which has rendered sections of the law invalid and unconstitutional. Most amendments have dealt with education and freedom of expression (signage).

The most recent and holistic amendment to Bill 101 was proposed by a PQ government in 2012: Bill 14. These amendments were eventually pulled from the agenda and not put to a vote after receiving widespread criticism and little support.

However, modern language laws can be viewed as beginning with Bill 63 and Bill 22. Adopted under provincial Liberal governments, they declared French to be the ‘official’ language of Quebec and that newcomers to Quebec be enrolled in French-language schools.

The jurisprudence: Numerous court cases have been initiated to challenge key sections of the law. The Blaikie cases (named for Peter Blaikie, Bishop’s University graduate and founder of national and now defunct law firm Heenan Blaikie LLP) rendered substantial portions of the law unconstitutional under section 133 of our 1867 Constitution, namely that legislation, regulation, other official documents and the administration of courts was only official if

adopted in both English and French, Quebec’s two official languages. This resulted in bleary-eyed members of Quebec’s legislature having to stay up all night to pass the English language translations of all laws adopted since 1976.

Education has consistently been a fulcrum of debate, with legal rulings expanding access to English-language education after the introduction of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms in our 1982 Constitutional amendments. This has expanded schooling to all Canadians whose parents are educated in English in Canada in 1984, to Solski in 2005 which determined which education routes for children were “authentic pathways” to Englishlanguage schooling and most recently the Nguyen case determining what is a “major part” of educational instruction in English.

Reasoning for adoption: The intent for the adoption of Bill 101 is not referred to directly, though the preamble of the law spells out the importance of the “quality and influence of the French language assured, and is resolved therefore to make of French the language of Government and the Law, as well as the normal and everyday language of work, instruction, communication, commerce and business.”

Bill 101 was adopted following the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism and Quebec’s Gendron Commission studying language in Canada.

However, numerous aspects and the thorough research accompanying these reports were largely distorted when the newly elected PQ government released their White Paper accompanying the introduction of Bill 101 for debate.

Bill 101 was in part designed to respond to language-based economic disparity by increasing the use of French in commerce, business and the professions, and as a long term consequence, improve the socio-economic position of the Francophone majority in the province.

The protection of the French-language from diminishing numerical status was a key goal in regards to implementing Bill 101.

Socio-economic characteristics Quebec English-speakers:

According to statistics from the analysis ‘The Socio-economic Status of English-speaking: Those who Left and Those who Stayed by Floch, W. and Pocock, J. published in R.Y. Bourhis’ ‘The Vitality of the English-speaking Communities of Quebec: From Community Decline to Revival. Montreal, Quebec: CEETUM, Université de Montréal.), the English-speaking community is a population in decline. Over 50 percent of English-speakers have left the province vs. a 96 percent retention rate for Francophones living in Quebec. Only Francophones in Newfoundland have lower minority language group retention rates. Mothertongue English-speakers experienced a substantial demographic decline in the 1971-2001 period, experiencing a loss both in absolute numbers (from 788,800 in 1971 to 591 365 in 2001) and as a proportion of the Quebec population (from 13.1 per cent to 8.3 per cent).

According to the analysis by Flock and Pocock, the nature of Anglophone outmigration over the past generation, which has contributed to a bimodal population profile of the Quebec Anglophone group which is over-represented at both the lower and upper ends of the socioeconomic spectrum. There growing under-class in the Anglophone population which is noticeably characterized by a sizable visible minority, immigrant group in urban settings. In rural settings this Anglophone underclass emerges as a somewhat marginalized, “left-behind” community.

Flock and Pocock’s analysis goes on to discuss three major observations regarding English-speaking populations around Quebec.

The first observation is that Englishspeakers tend to be over-represented at both the upper and lower ends of the socioeconomic of spectrum. This bi-modal or “missing middle” representation of the Quebec Anglophone population has great potential to explain its distinctive economic profile, and underlines the importance of qualifying any generalization of Anglophones as a privileged minority in Quebec.

The second observation is that the occupational status of the English-speaking minority appears to be declining across generations relative to their Francophone counterparts in the province.

Thirdly, the analysis demonstrates that there is an important regional dimension to socio-economic status, with greater vulnerabilities in the Englishspeaking minorities residing in the eastern and rural parts of the province. Effect on the Eastern Townships: The English-speaking community is defined by a declining population, an aging population, and what is described as the “missing-middle” with Englishspeakers aged 15 to 44 who have, on average, lower levels of education, income and employment than their Frenchspeaking counterparts. A majority of English-speaking women are out of the labour market. Youth stand to earn 4,000 dollars less a year than a francophone their age with the same education. Between 1971 and 2001, due to economic and political instability in Quebec, the number of English-speaking Townshippers dropped almost 30 per cent.

Effect on preservation of the Frenchlanguage: Mother-tongue French-speakers increased by nearly a million, from 4,866,030 in 1971 (81 per cent of the population) to 5,802,020 in 2001 (81.4 per cent) and up again to 5,916,840 in 2006 (79.6 per cent).

Today, evidence tells us that in forty years the tables have been turned and French-speaking citizens are now an advantaged majority within Quebec with respect to level of income, employability and decision-making power within its institutions (Vaillancourt & Vaillancourt, 2005).

The only trend that indicates a decline in the presence of French-speakers is on the Island of Montreal. The number of francophones, migration, birth and death rates are either stable or favourable to the French language in Quebec.

Conclusions: There remains no statistical evidence that the French-language is in decline in Quebec. That the number of French-speakers has increased, while the percentage of francophones has remained stable is not necessarily attributed to the societal change caused by Bill 101. French-speakers now ascendant in Quebec economically, socially and politically can likely be attributed to the structural changes which accompanied Bill 101.

The evidence is stark that Bill 101 and accompanying legislation has contributed to a drastic decline in the relative weight, status, and wealth of the English-speaking community.