Should federal leaders intervene on Quebec’s Bill 21?
The premier says it’s nobody else’s business. Wrong, argues Jack Jedwab.
At the very start of the election campaign, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did not entirely dismiss the possibility of some intervention on Quebec’s Bill 21. This prompted Quebec Premier François Legault to ask all party leaders to permanently stay out of this purely provincial matter.
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer was quick to heed the call, suggesting that it was not the place of the federal leaders to encroach on the province’s jurisdiction. Legault also secured support for his stand from provincial Liberal leadership front-runner Dominique Anglade (a former member of Legault’s political party) who echoed the premier’s view that any decision regarding Bill 21 — the province’s law banning many public servants from wearing religious symbols — had to be made by Quebecers only.
Quebec politicians seemingly feel it is inappropriate for “outsiders” to involve themselves in the business of their province, and in particular when it comes to concerns expressed by “their” minorities. But they don’t always follow their own rule when it comes to other provinces.
The case that immediately comes to mind is that of minority francophones in Ontario. In response to Premier Doug Ford’s regrettable cuts to French-language services and the initial decision to drop government support for the creation of a French-language university in Toronto, Legault asked his Ontario counterpart to reverse course. Thankfully, Legault did not “stay out of it.” Indeed, he ultimately strengthened the resolve of the Trudeau government to get involved in this “provincial matter” and that led to a pre-election agreement with the Ontario government to revive the French-language university. Unsurprisingly, no Quebec officials raised any concern about federal encroachment on behalf of Ontario’s French-language minorities — for the simple reason that they fully expected them to do so.
To his credit, there is consistency in Conservative leader Scheer’s position on Quebec’s
Bill 21 and on the issue of minority French language services in Ontario. He has described both cases as being within the jurisdiction of the respective provinces and thereby justified his decision not to intervene. On the issue of French-language services, Scheer concluded that “people in the next federal election will be voting on federal issues, and people in provincial elections are voting on provincial issues.” In short, he would no more tell Premier Ford what to do than he would Premier Legault when it comes to minorities in their respective provinces. He did insist, however, that his “support for official languages is unwavering” and that his position on francophone issues has been both “clear and strong.”
In last Thursday evening’s leadership debate, he took a similar stand. On the one hand, he said he would not intervene on Bill 21 but at the same time insisted that the Conservatives were the champions of individual rights. In other words, Scheer claims to be an outspoken defender of individual and minority rights in Canada, but not necessarily when such issues arise in Quebec and Ontario.
Some observers will object to the comparison between the rights of minority francophones in Ontario and the rights of religious minorities in Quebec. After all, many Quebecers will correctly affirm that there are constitutional commitments to protect the rights of minority language francophones, and a legislative commitment to promote the vitality of these vulnerable communities.
On the other hand, several Quebec pundits and politicians will point out that religious minorities do not benefit from historic commitments. Minority religious groups in Quebec are rarely described as vulnerable and the relatively few amongst them who wear religious signs have been held up as a threat to the province’s majority. They should, however, still benefit from protection from the Quebec and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, Legault has insisted that no one’s rights are at risk with Bill 21. Yet he felt compelled to invoke the “notwithstanding” clause in the legislation to override his province’s charter, and maintained that the law was strictly within the province’s purview.
But Bill 21 also overrides the freedom of religion provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights. Regrettably, with their sights on either preserving or gaining votes in Quebec, our federal political leaders seem willing to look the other way with respect to Bill 21. With such inaction they imply, rather ironically, that the infringement on religious freedoms is happening in Quebec and not in Canada.
Jack Jedwab is president of the Association for Canadian Studies.
Quebec politicians seemingly feel it is inappropriate for “outsiders” to involve themselves in the business of their province, and in particular when it comes to concerns expressed by “their” minorities.
Jack Jedwab, president of the Association for Canadian Studies