Legault's plan to ban religious symbols is a political winner

The Quebec government delivered its throne speech for the last time on November 28, 1989. Liberal Prime Minister Robert Bourbada had just been re-elected following a landslide following his use of the the notwithstanding clause to overturn a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada that invalidated the province's ban on British commercial signs.

Bourbada's decision to invoke the nuclear option, suspending the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the English-speaking minority in Quebec, provoked outrage in the rest of Canada. The constitutional agreement of 1987 on Meech Lake, which recognized Quebec as a "distinct society," was already fragile. Despite his game, Mr. Bourbada sealed the sad fate of Meech.

And yet, the tone of this throne speech opening a new session of the National Assembly was resolved: "This Quebec society must remain a society [based on] The French language and culture is both a welcoming place for newcomers and a fertile place of solidarity between French-speaking and English-speaking Quebeckers. "

A few months earlier, Mr. Bourbada realized that the Premier of Quebec had a responsibility that had him above all others: to defend the francophone majority of the province when it felt threatened. His decision to invoke the notwithstanding clause, even though it fueled the ephemeral rise of a party defending the rights of Anglophones, was highly appreciated by Francophones. According to a Gallup poll conducted in 1989, more than three quarters of Quebeckers considered the preservation of culture to be more important than freedom of speech.

The more it changes. While Quebec has since adopted a compromise of work (and constitutional) on the signs – French must be predominant, English is allowed in smaller characters – each Premier of Quebec must understand that his primary task is to protect the distinct culture of the province from any threat, real or perceived.

For the Quebec premier, François Legault, a former sovereignist, it comes naturally. Speech from the throne on Wednesday at the opening of the first session of the first coalition of the Avenir Québec coalition confirmed Legault's intention to legislate, probably in the spring, to ban state employees in the same position. Authority to carry religious symbols prominently. "This question has been around for 10 years now. Quebeckers have enough, "said Legault after the Speech from the Throne.

Mr. Legault insists that his proposed prohibition of religious symbols – which would apply to judges, police officers, Crown prosecutors, prison guards and teachers – has support majority among Quebecers. And on this point, at least, it is unequivocally correct.

A CROP survey commissioned by Radio-Canada and published this week to coincide with the Speech from the Throne revealed that more than 70% of Quebecers agree with the CAQ plan to ban judges, police and Crown attorneys to wear religious symbols. Sixty-five percent agree that the law should be extended to teachers, despite the opposition of the two members of the Bouchard-Taylor commission on religious accommodation in 2008, who proposed to the 39 originated a ban on religious symbols among state agents in positions of authority.

The philosopher of McGill University, Charles Taylor, has since dissociated from the main recommendation of his report. And during an interview granted last month to the Montreal Gazette, he did not mince his words about what he thinks of the CAQ plan: "Dangerous, appalling, destructive of division." – choose your epithet. I mean, it's a terrible mistake we're committing ourselves to. "

Gérard Bouchard, historian and sociologist at the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi, is keen on his report, but he strongly criticizes the CAQ's plan to include teachers on its list of students. State agents prohibiting wearing the Muslim hijab, the Jewish yarmulke, the Sikh turban or the Christian. crucifix in the performance of their professional duties

The CROP survey did not disaggregate results by language or religion. However, since the prohibition of religious symbols is almost as strong in the Greater Montréal area as in the rest of the province, the survey results suggest that Quebecers are divided according to language criteria on this issue, and not those of urban and rural areas. In fact, Quebecers with a university degree are just as likely to support a ban on religious symbols as those who do not. Graduate Quebeckers are also nearly as likely (51%) to support the maintenance of the crucifix in the National Assembly – in the name of cultural rather than religious preservation – as those with a high school diploma (55%).

Mr. Legault entrusted the task of developing a bill banning religious symbols to his Minister of Immigration, Simon Jolin-Barrette, a very clever 31-year-old lawyer who says his bill would survive to a constitutional challenge. Many legal experts doubt it. In any event, Mr. Legault indicated that he would invoke the notwithstanding clause if his law was invalidated.

After all, a Premier of Quebec must do what a Premier of Quebec must do.