The Legault government seeks to strengthen secularism in schools. Whatever his strategic motivations, he responds to a real problem. But the options seem limited. A priori, no legislative or regulatory solution is necessary.
Posted at 1:11 a.m.
Updated at 7:00 a.m.
The government’s thinking was revealed on Friday by my colleague Tommy Chouinard. It stems from the scandal at Bedford elementary school in Montreal.
Fundamentalist Muslim teachers discouraged young girls from playing soccer, denied learning disabilities or the autism spectrum, prevented professionals from helping young people in difficulty and bypassed science or sex education classes.
Described as the “dominant clan” in a disturbing report from the Ministry of Education, these zealots also intimidated teachers of North African origin who stood up to them.
Perhaps Quebec will find things to tighten to better prevent such cases, or to crack down sooner. But reading the report, we see above all that remedies already existed. The problem is that we didn’t use them. For fear of appearing intolerant or administrative cowardice.
Let us go back to the stormy genesis of the secularism charter projects, which prohibited the wearing of ostentatious religious symbols.
In the CAQ version, Law 21 adopted in 2019, this ban targets those who represent the coercive or “moral” authority of the state.
Critics of the charter consider this measure unnecessary. According to them, Quebec is already secular. Secularism would concern the State, and not individuals. The law would thus limit freedom of religion without having demonstrated that this resolves a real problem, as our case law requires.
In other words, this law was a bad response to a false problem. And, even worse, she was uninhibited by intolerant speech.
The Bedford School report calls for a reassessment of this analysis.
Of course, we can use the incident to question Law 21. It prevents women dressed in religious symbols from carrying out their jobs, even if they are competent and dedicated. While men who do not wear religious symbols can drive their dogma into the brains of young children.
But this criticism still implies a major reversal.
From now on, we recognize that secularism is not acquired at school.
We cannot say that the Bedford School is an isolated case either. Audits are underway at Saint-Pascal-Baylon (primary), Bienville (primary) and La Voie (secondary) schools.
People may retort that the subject concerns the practice of teaching, and not the secularism of the State. This nuance, however, does not change the observation: the threat of a return of religion to school.
In Bedford, the mechanisms failed.
The school administration and the school service center failed to evaluate teachers and handle complaints. And the union misinterpreted professional autonomy – it cannot be exercised “to the detriment of the rights of others”.
In short, it was possible to act.
The debate on secularism has polarized Quebec. Opponents of the law portrayed their adversaries as intolerant nationalists. Above all, we must not give them ammunition and fuel the fear of the other. But this taboo only helps the opposing camp. It can also lead to abuses like at the Bedford school.
True, if these fundamentalist professors were able to crack down for seven years, it is partly because of the usual administrative negligence. But religious unease also cooled the authorities. Who wants to be called racist?
Quebec wonders if changes could facilitate future interventions. For example, no sanction is provided in the law for a teacher who violates his duty to contribute to the development of students.
Two examples to this effect.
The first: abusive or seriously incompetent teachers have already been transferred from one school to another instead of being fired. The weakness of the authorities therefore does not only concern religion.
The second: a teacher who made “sometimes extreme” remarks against Islam and his Muslim students lost his certificate this year. The school service center first had him change schools. But the parents mobilized, a petition was sent and his patent was withdrawn. It was at the La Voie school, which is today the subject of checks for proselytism. Anti-religious behavior was more quickly denounced there.
So much the better if Quebec strengthens the remedies to crack down on the very small minority of teachers at fault. But management and unions will have to use them, for everyone.
The Bedford case reflects another broader phenomenon, that of the difficulty for schools to play their role.
Quebec offers interculturalism. He promises to integrate newcomers into the official language, by sharing common values.
This is a challenge at school, as demonstrated in the latest sociocultural portrait of Montreal public schools.
In certain public establishments, the number does not allow this integration.
In some Montreal high schools, Arabic is by far the language most often spoken at home by students. In others, Mandarin is more present than French. These young people will be less likely to know and like the culture of their host society. And conversely, private schools become ghettoized by welcoming mainly white French-speaking students who have little understanding of cultural communities.
Teachers are concerned about the return of sexism and homophobia among young boys. The influence of masculinists is rightly denounced. But religious conservatism is also responsible. It also strikes first in the diasporas. Muslims who have fled fundamentalism are the first to suffer its pressures.
It will be said that the law on secularism was supposed to send a message by clearly affirming this principle. But polarization has made it, for some, a taboo.
By wanting to tackle it, the CAQ government is reacting to a real problem. To work, its thinking must be unifying.
The fear of appearing bad in our adult debates should not lead to tolerating religious excesses among our children.
Related News :