What is it?
For those who have not heard about it yet, the Charte des valeurs is a controversial bill proposed by the government of Quebec and officially introduced to the parliament last Tuesday. The charter falls under the porfolio of Bernard Drainville, the minister responsible for Democratic Institutions and citizen participation. According to Prime Minister Pauline Marois, the goal of the charter is to “clarify the fact that the State has to stay neutral and that religion is a personal issue”. Even before its introduction, the bill was highly criticised not only in Quebec, but also in other regions of the country, both from politicians and intellectuals. This controversy is unsurprising and will certainly be difficult to resolve as the charter discusses values, religions and politics, and these three spheres of our collective and individual lives have historically been topics fraught with dissent and debate.
What does the bill propose?
- The principle of the State’s religious neutrality must be included in the Charte québécoise des droits et libertés de la personne;
- Employees of the State must be neutral: “Political neutrality is already required of state officials; we propose that religious neutrality should be required of all persons working for the State.” (Bernard Drainville);
- Employees of the State will not be allowed to wear easily visible religious symbols: “The government believes that the time has come to make the religious neutrality of our public institutions official” (Bernard Drainville). This rule would apply for employees of ministries and public organisms; judges, prosecutors, police and correctional officers, CPE and subsidized private nursery employees; employees of the school boards, public schools, cégeps and universities; health and social services employees and municipal employees (Cégeps, universities and health and social services establishments’ employees will benefit from a renewable five years exception to the rule, conditional to the approval of the board of governors);
- In all situations, the face must remain uncovered;
- All public establishments will have to establish an implementation policy.
Reaction within educational establishments
The government seems united and ready to defend the ideas behind the charter. Since the presentation of the bill, Bernard Drainville has accepted almost every media request to answer any questions. Although many members of civil society as well as opposition parties seem to agree with some of the main ideas, the bill sparked a lot of critics, in particular in concern to the banning of religious symbols for all employees of the state. The charter, in its current form has been criticized, for instance, by all provincial opposition parties, all of Canada’s federal parties, the co-presidents of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission, the Federation autonome de l’enseignement du Québec (FAE) and from many others across Canada. Others, like the Bloc Québécois, Quebec City mayor Régis Labeaume, and the union representing the public service of Quebec have already expressed their support for the charter. The banning of almost all religious symbols for every employee that works for the state, which is the most criticized part of the charter, is clearly not accepted by a major segment the population, especially in regards to the consequences it could have on an already vulnerable population. It is expected that many more organizations will make their position known over the next few days and weeks.
Interestingly, in parallel with the debate occurring in Quebec, the French Ministry of Education has recently adopted a Charte de la laïcité, which will be displayed in all public school establishments.
SSMU and McGill reactions
SSMU, through its’ democratic institutions, is currently reflecting on its position vis-à-vis the Quebec Charter of Values. In this sense, we have not taken a specific position on the charter. However, it is already evident that there is a flagrant contradiction between the fundamental values upheld by the SSMU, such as equity and anti-discrimination, and the provisions of the charter as announced by Minister Drainville. It is important to note that in its current form, the charter has serious implications for many of our members. SSMU will publicize its position once it is officially adopted.
As for McGill, its position was clearly pronounced on its website. Principal Suzanne Fortier wrote a message which reiterated her opposition to the charter: “The right of religious choice and cultural diversity are essential values for the McGill community […] The University must remain a place for the free and full exchange of ideas. The proposal to prohibit our professors and staff from wearing visible religious symbols runs contrary to our principles. The wearing of such symbols in no way interferes with the religious and political neutrality of McGill as an institution.”
Image credit: Image courtesy of Getideaka at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
