Québec enacts law banning face coverings in public places

If they live in Québec, these women might well start looking over their shoulders, keeping their eyes (only) open for the long arm of the law, for starting soon they will be in violation of a law requiring Québec people who give or receive any public service to uncover their faces.

Bill 62, which Walt thinks might well be called the Open Face Law, was passed by the National Assembly (legislature) last week. It applies to all provincial ministries, school boards, universities, public health care institutions, subsidized day care centres, municipalities, and public transit authorities.

Also covered (or uncovered, if you'll forgive the pun) are doctors, dentists and midwives. So if you're in a doctor's office, no matter whether you're the doctor or the patient, take off that veil! Walt wonders if there's an exception for surgical masks. There should be no problem for dental patients, though. How could you get your teeth cleaned with your face covered? [I've always wondered about that too. Maybe Muslim women don't go to the dentist? Ed.]

Bill 62 details under what circumstances employers and schools should refuse requests for time off for religious reasons. It would also bar taxpayer-subsidized daycares from teaching children specific religious beliefs.

The fundamental principle of Bill 62 is the duty of religious neutrality which is considered necessary in a society which is determined to be an exemplar of secular humanism. This is a 180-degree turn from the Québec of old, of the days before the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s, when the teachings of the (pre-Vatican II) Church established the norms of morality and propriety for Canada's most Catholic province.

The secular values of the New Québec were set out back in 2013 in the Charter of Québec Values proposed by the Parti Québecois, which was then in power, in response to the anger of old stock Québecois over religious accommodation -- the PC notion that Canadians should had to adapt to the social and religious customs of non-Christian (read: Muslim) immigrants. The PQ was defeated in the next provincial election, but in 2015 similar legislation was introduced by the new Liberal government as Bill 62.

Although Bill 62 doesn't mention the niqab or burqa specifically, Justice Minister Stéphanie Vallée said that, since the law will apply to municipalities, metropolitan communities and public transit organizations. anyone who rides a bus or the Métro (subway) must be unveiled. Mme Vallée told CBC Montreal's Daybreak yesterday that a woman who normally wears a burqa or niqab would have to show her face for the duration of her ride, "as long as the service is being rendered."

Beyond the face-covering ban, the Bill 62 sets out broad limits for all requests for religious accommodation. It says a request has to be "serious", respect the right to equality between men and women and "the right of every person to be treated without discrimination." Opposition to the legislation has come chiefly from the members of one religious group. Walt will leave you to guess which religion that is. Hint: It's one of the three Abrahamic religions... the newest one of the three... Geddit?

Further reading:
"Hijab, niqab, burqa -- what's the difference?", WWW 28/7/10.
"Nobody likes the Charter of Québec Values...except the people!", WWW 23/1/14.

Québec reintroduces legislation to ban wearing of niqab

In the fall of 2013, the government of the Canadian province of Québec introduced legislation which would have banned the wearing of religious headgear and other "ostentatious" religious symbols in public. See "Multiculti types horrified as Charter of Québec Values bans religious headgear".

The usual gang of secular humanists and "progressive thinkers" howled that the proposed law was Islamophobic, racist, sexist, yada yada yada. In fact, as Walt's post shows, the ban would have applied not just to headcoverings worn by Muslim women -- hijabs, niqabs, and burqas -- but to turbans and kipas worn by Sikh and Jewish men, and large Christian crosses or crucifixed which might be worn by either sex.

In spite of the outcry from the celebrators of diversity, the Charter of Québec Values had strong public support among the real people of la Belle Province, and looked like being a winning ballot question when then-Premier Pauline Marois called an election. Sadly for her (and for the Charter), rookie candidate Pierre Karl Péladeau started ranting about sovereignty and separation, and the PQ was soundly defeated by Philippe Couillard's Liberals, who had taken the position that the proposed Charter went too far, and anyway there were more important things to worry about.

Fast forward to this week. Now that the more important things have been taken care of (???), M. Couillard's government has introduced Bill 62 -- legislation which would bar Québec public servants from wearing face-covering religious garments at work, and preventing members of the public from covering their faces while receiving government services.

Isn't this the same movie, produced by the PQ, that we saw in 2013? Well, no, said Québec Justice Minister Stéphanie Vallée. The "neutrality bill", as she calls it, wouldn't ban all religious symbols, and would accommodate certain symbols under certain conditions. "We don't judge people for their beliefs or absence of beliefs," she said. "We are convinced the way we are approaching this is respectful and will be a plus for society."

The formal title of Bill 62 -- click here to see the entire text in English -- is "An Act to foster adherence to State religious neutrality and, in particular, to provide a framework for religious accommodation requests in certain bodies". Catchy, eh? Here's the explanatory introduction.

The purpose of this bill is to establish measures to foster adherence to State religious neutrality. For that purpose, it provides, in particular, that personnel members of public bodies must demonstrate religious neutrality in the exercise of their functions, being careful to neither favour nor hinder a person because of the person’s religious affiliation or non-affiliation. However, this duty does not apply to personnel members who, in certain bodies, provide spiritual care and guidance services or are in charge of providing instruction of a religious nature.

Under the bill, personnel members of public bodies and of certain other bodies must exercise their functions with their face uncovered, unless they have to cover their face, in particular because of their working conditions or because of occupational or task-related requirements. In addition, persons receiving services from such personnel members must have their face uncovered. An accommodation is possible but must be refused if the refusal is warranted in the context for security or identification reasons or because of the level of communication required.

The bill establishes the conditions under which accommodations on religious grounds may be granted as well as the specific elements that must be considered when dealing with certain accommodation requests.

It specifies that the measures it introduces must not be interpreted as affecting the emblematic and toponymic elements of Québec’s cultural heritage, in particular its religious cultural heritage, that testify to its history.

Lastly, special measures with respect to educational childcare services are introduced to ensure that, among other considerations, children’s admission is not related to their learning a specific religious belief, dogma or practice and that the activities organized by subsidized childcare providers do not involve learning of a religious or dogmatic nature.

Walt likes that wording a whole lot, and congratulates the legal eagles who came up with language which looks (to Agent 3) to be 99.9% human-rights-challenge-proof. Canada's Minister for Multiculturalism -- yes, they do have such a thing -- appears to agree. Tim Uppal, a Sikh gentleman never seen without his turban, told reporters yesterday, "We broadly support Québec's legislation regarding the uncovering of faces for giving and receiving public services."

In fact, he said, the federal government will introduce a similar bill just before the House of Commons takes its summer break. It's just a coincidence, of course, that Steve Harper's Tories have to pick up a lot of Québec seats in the federal election due in October. "Our government will be moving forward in the coming days with legislation with respect to the face coverings at citizenship ceremonies," Mr. Uppal said, "and we will consider what other measures may be necessary."

Fact: The only people required by their religion to cover their faces are Muslim women.

Further reading on WWW: "Hijab, niqab, burqa -- what's the difference?" and "'Culture wars' in Canada? Really?"

Québec votes to leave well enough alone

Yesterday, as Walt et tout le monde predicted, the voters of Québec turfed out the Parti Québecois of Pauline Marois, and gave the Liberals, led by Philippe Couillard, a solid majority in the province's Assemblée Nationale. Lifetime pct .990.

Mme Marois lost her own riding. Her star candidate, Pierre-Karl Péladeau, whose ill-judged remarks about building a "country" for his children contributed to the defeat, won his seat and may be a contender for the PQ leadership, now that Mme Marois has stepped down. The more moderate Coalition Avenir Québec held its own, while Québec Solidaire (the most leftish separatists) increased their representation by 50% -- from two seats to three.

What does all this mean? The first clue may be seen in the half-cent rise in the value of the Canadian dollar on the foreign exchange markets this morning. Québec is not going to separate. Canada is not going to break up. The rest of the world (to the extent that it cares at all) is reassured.

Canadians, including most Québecers, were never in serious doubt. The Québecois like talking about "sovereignty" -- not as strong a word as "independence" -- but when it comes down to giving up the beaverbuck, massive federal subsidies and their Canadian passports, common sense always prevails. Referenda on separation were lost in 1980 and 1995, so the issue was due to come around again, but that didn't mean the idea would fly.

This year's election was not a referendum as such, but "a referendum on a referendum". Not even the PQ's proposal to have a real referendum "when the time is right" found favour with the voters. It seems they would prefer to talking about it to doing it.

Does that mean separatism is dead? No. There will always be those in Québec who, in their wild, romantic dreams, would like to secede from Canada, just as there are closet Confederates throughout the southern USA or "splittists" in western China. But those who hold onto visions of a state of their own are getting fewer...and older.

The separatist movement in Québec was born in the hippy-dippy 60s. (The PQ itself was founded by René Levesque and others in 1970.) Polling and yesterday's results show that today's true believers are mostly over-55s, outside of Montréal. The younger generation is more interested in putting food on the table than in whether or not the packaging is in French. Pro-soverignty sentiment is not dead, but it's dying, along with the aging baby boomers who espoused it.

Does yesterday's vote signify a rejection of the PQ's proposed Charter of Québec Values? Although the anglophone media and "progressive thinkers" might wish it so, Walt thinks otherwise. When Mme Marois called the election, the Charter was supposed to be the ballot question. At the beginning of the campaign it was assumed that the PQ would win, because of majority support for the Charter in all of Québec except the parts of Montréal with large immigrant populations. It only remained to be seen whether the PQ would get a majority or not.

The now-ex-premier's big mistake was introducing P-K Péladeau as her star candidate. The idea seemed to be to bolster the PQ's shaky reputation for economic competence, and show that an independent Québec could be successful and prosperous, just like M Péladeau. Unfortunately for Mme Marois, M Péladeau took it all too seriously, and started talking about sovereignty and the R-word ("referendum"). He even spoke of a "country" for his children, while giving the now-infamous fist-pump -- a truly cringeworth moment.

A video clip that went viral showed Mme Marois literally shoving M Péladeau to the side of the platform, but the genie was out of the bottle, and the voters saw a future that they didn't like. It was all over at that very moment, with only the magnitude of the Liberal victory to be determined.

La Belle Province and all of Canada can breathe a sigh of relief. For another generation or so, Québecers (and the rest of Canada) can continue to argue about sovereignty and bilingualism and multiculturalism, but nothing will change. The Montréal Canadiens will remain Canada's team, and you'll still be able to order a hamburger -- not "un hambourgeois" -- most anywhere in what will still be a province of Canada. Une province pas comme les autres, to be sure, but a part of Canada all the same.

Shock announcement from Marois: Separate Québec to be subdivided!

In "Elections coming up in Québec and Afghanistan -- who cares?", Walt explained how Pauline Marois was poised to lose the provincial election due on April 7th. Her Parti Québecois looked like being a shoo-in, thanks to widespread support among francophone (French-speaking) voters for the proposed Québec Charter of Rights and Values, which would get hijabs and other funny clothes off the streets and ensure that "au Québec on ne parle que français".

Keen observers like Walt could see that the immigrants, Muslims, Jews and têtes-carrées (English speakers) were lining up squarely against the PQ. They alone would only have secured opposition victories in a few ridings in the West Island of Montréal. But then, with the emergence of P-K Péladeau as the PQ's star candidate, came more talk of a referendum on separation from The Rest Of Canada. That kind of talk makes even les vrais Québecois nervous, because they don't want to lose their Canadian passports, dollars and "entitlements".

So, in a stunning volte-face, Mme Marois will today announce that if Québec separates from TROC, certain parts of la Belle Province will be allowed to separate from Québec to form their own ethnic homelands. Her idea is said to have been inspired by the success of the "Bantu Homelands" in the pre-1994 Republic of South Africa.

In Montréal, Côte-des-Neiges-NDG will become a separate ghetto ["republic", surely! Ed.] named "New Jerusalem", which will be closed from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday. Mackenzie King Park will be renamed David Ben-Gurion Park. Government policy will follow the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Just to the east, Westmount will have its official status changed to that of a Dominion of Her Britannic Majesty. No decision has been made as to a new name, but there is strong support for "Wolfeville". Westmount Park will not be renamed "Plains of Abraham" because of the risk of offence to residents of New Jerusalem.

Other regions which elect to separate from a separate Québec will be officially multicultural. All ethnicities and cultures will be celebrated, except for the French/English/Scottish/Irish. Secular humanism will be the official religion, but Muslims will be allowed to pray in the streets and build mosques on the sites of churches, as is already done in the Middle East. Sharia law will apply to all citizens, as is already the case in Indonesia.

This secession of the non-French parts of Québec -- effective from June 31st -- will leave the rest of the new republic to white, French-speaking "Christians". Applications to immigrate are already pouring in from the Greater Toronto Area.

Elections coming up in Québec and Afghanistan -- who cares?

In the first week of April two "states" are holding elections of some interest to Walt, if not TROTW (The Rest of the World). I put "states" in quotes because we're talking about Québec -- actually a province of Canada, whether it* likes it or not -- and Afghanistan, an occupied territory of the Paranoid States of America.

The idea that there might be an election, no matter how flawed, in the Armpit of the Middle East is being hailed as a great triumph for the USA and its "coalition of the willing". The Afghan people will be free to vote for a replace for outgoing president Mohammad Krazai, we are told. That means there's at least a modicum of peace and stability in the almost-failed state. Yeah, sure. Walt is listening to a radio (!) report from the sandpit right now. Gunfire is clearly audible in the background.

The shooting is probably being done by the Taliban. Yes, they are still there, in spite the lost of 1000s of lives and billions of dollars over a dozen years, trying to run them out of Dodge. Latest realistic estimates put the numbers of Taliban higher than ever, and now they are threatening to kill anyone and everyone who dares to participate in the putative election. Their attack on the Serena Hotel a few days ago shows that they can do it, too... with impunity.

Meanwhile, there will be a free and fair provincial election in Québec. It will be as honest and democratic as such things ever get in la Belle Province, which is to say about as honest and democratic as an election in Chicago. The outcome is, however, of interest to the governments of Canada and (believe it or not) the UK, Russia and China, because of the spectre of separation.

That's right, messieurs/dames, the Québécois are having one of their periodic dithers about whether or not to remain a part of Canada. The real countries mentioned above are interested because they are all trying to figure out what to do about separatist movement in their own nations. The Scots want to separate from Britain. The Chechens and others want to separate from Russia. And Uighurs and Tibetans quite understandably want out of China.

The Québec election wasn't supposed to be about separation. The Parti Québécois, which has had a minority government for the last couple of years, decided to ride a wave of popular support following its introduction of a new Charter of Québec Values, so called a snap election. They looked set to win a majority because the people of Québec, outside of Montréal, really dislike the Islamization of their society.

Unfortunately for Québec Premier Pauline Marois, the prospect of a big win went to her head. She brought in a "star candidate", Pierre-Karl Péladeau, owner of the Québecor media conglomerate. M Péladeau's presence on the platform was meant to show the people that Québec is... or could be... an economic powerhouse on its own, and that's exactly what P-K said, with emphasis on the "I-word" -- Independence. Mme Marois had no choice but to say that, yes, her government would hold yet another referendum, when the time was right... whenever that might be.

The I-word and the R-word, combined in the same speeches, have scared the bejazus out of the naturally conservative Québécois, who are loath to give up things Canadian -- like Canadian passports, Canadian pensions and Canadian dollars. Look for the opposition Liberals to be returned to power and the debate over separatism to be ended... until next time.

As for Afghanistan, it doesn't matter who wins. The pitiful country, awash in opium, will continue to be plagued by corruption and violence. At some point it will officially be declared a "failed state". Perhaps some Western governments will at last admit that the mission to save the Afghans from themselves was a failure. But Walt wouldn't bet on it.

Lifetime pct .986.

* Interpret "it" either way, as you please.

Nobody likes the Charter of Québec Values...except the people!

The proposed Charter of Québec values has rung the bell of the lamestream media and the chattering classes, both in la Belle Province and in TROC (The Rest of Canada). Those calling it "racist", "anti-Muslim", and "unhelpful" -- you know the list of epithets -- include the Federation of Québec School Boards, the association representing the province's health care industry, and even the Québec Bar Association, which says the Charter will certainly be challenged in the courts.

What's really causing those who celebrate diversity to soil their silkies is the possibility that the Parti Québecois -- presently a minority government -- will call a snap election with the Charter (and only that) as the ballot question. Latest polls put the PQ in first place (ahead of the Liberals), with 36% of decided voters likely to back them. If polling day results reflect those numbers, the PQ would be returned with a majority.

Why? Because the real people of Québec -- even in the "culturally diverse" Montréal region -- overwhelmingly support the proposal. On Monday, a Léger poll found that that 60% Québecois back the Charter. Among the crucial francophone voters, that number rises to just short of 70%!

It's real people -- like the Pineault-Caron family, from the Saguenay town of Sacré-Coeur -- who are speaking out against religious and cultural "accommodation", meaning the stealthy Islamization of their heretofore white Christian society. The video of part of their testimony about the upsetting sights and sounds of Islam they suffered during their travels in Morocco and Turkey — and their conclusion that it is "unthinkable" to allow people in such "disguises" to roam around in public in Québec — became a YouTube sensation, registering over 300,000 hits so far.

Some Québecois see the charter as little more than an electoral ploy. The pundits and "progressive thinkers" of the anglophone media accuse the PQ of playing the "politics of division", to get back the francophone vote they lost to the Coalition Avenir Quebec in the last election. If that's the plan, it's working; the Leger poll says support for the CAQ is down 10 points from the 2012 election.

What about a court challenge, if the Charter is enacted? For the liberals and diversity-lovers, the wish will almost certainly be father to the thought and grandfather to court challenges under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Such action would bring the whole issue of diversity and "accommodation" not just to the Supreme Court of Canada (ultimately) but to the attention of the real people in TROC. According to Walt's Canuck agents, there are a great many -- outside of Toronto, the font of all evil -- who would be happy to see a similar law in force all over the Great Not-so-white North.

Further reading on WWW: "What Québec's new Charter of Values will and will not do"

Québec is NOT multicultural, says ex-premier Landry

Former Québec Premier Bernard Landry has reiterated his statement that la Belle Province "is not and should not be multicultural". Yesterday in Montréal, he told Génération Nationale that the Parti Québecois proposed Charter of Québec Values is simply a reflection of the historical and democgraphic facts.

Different ethnicities have been part of the Quebec nation since the earliest days, M. Landry told the sovereignist group, adding he has six different ethnic groups in his own family tree.

M. Landry said the debate now gripping the province is "intense" but civilized and reflects well on the people of Québec and on the PQ provincial government. The provincial Liberals should have done it years ago, he said, "but didn’t have the courage."

He might have added that there are a lot of Canadians in TROC who would like their federal or provincial governments to put similar legislation on the books, if only they had the cojones. Chances of such a proposal being made by any party of any political stripe anywhere (else) in Canada are slim and none.

Accept Québec values, black PQ minister warns immigrants

Ouais, Virginie, there are black people in Québec. One such is Maka Kotto, a former politician from Caméroun (a.k.a. Cameroon -- it's in Africa) who immigrated to Canada in 1990 and eventually drifted into, errr, politics. No surprise there. Now he's the current Minister of Tokenism [Culture and Communications, shurely! Ed.] in the Parti Québecois government.

That's the government that has just introduced a Charter of Québec values. If it becomes law, it will ban the wearing of religious headgear and other "overt" religious symbols -- a large crucifix, for example -- in any public workplace in la Belle Province.

Even though he's an immigrant and a vizmin, M Kotto agrees with the proposed charter. He told the Globe and Mailthat when he moved to France, he had to leave in Africa the panther's head that he used to wear on his chest.

Walt wouldn't kid you. M Kotto described himself to the interviewer as a “Catholic, with shamanistic tendencies”. Sounds typical of a member of the modern Church, but I digress. He was describing how "if I wanted to play the mystic, I could go around with my panther’s head on my chest. It’s my family totem. But I don’t, because I adhere to what are accepted as the values of the society that welcomed me.”

As the Assemblée Nationale resumed sitting yesterday, M Kotto said the Charter “applies to me too. When people arrive in a new family, the least we can do is to consider the values of the family and accept their values.”

And that's really the point. It's not that the sight of hijabs and turbans and Muslims praying in the streets makes Québecois see red [orange, surely. Ed.], although it does. The point is that people who choose to move into a land and culture which is not their own should make an effort to conform -- in public at least -- to the norms of that land and culture.

No matter what the lamestream media and the "experts" tell you, that's the majority opinion in America, Australia, Britain and Canada. Multiculturalism is contrary to human nature, and the "intellectuals", "progressives" and politicians who are forcing the wind of "diversity" down our throats will surely reap the whirlwind. Walt is telling you so.

PQ not so PC as TROC?

Too many abbreviations? Walt will provide a glossary. Let's start with "PQ". Before two-letter abbreviations for states and provinces were standardised, "PQ" was the commonly accepted shorthand for "Province of Quebec" or "Province du Québec" to be more PC -- note the accent. Today the correct form is "QC", while "PQ" refers to the Parti Québecois, the quasi-separatist political party which misgoverns la Belle Province.

The PQ, as well as being committed to (one day) seceding from The Rest Of Canada (TROC), is of a decidedly pinkish hue, thus resolutely secular humanist in its values. After the Roman Catholic Church turned its back on its own dogmas in the 1960s, that's pretty much how the majority of  Québecois think things should be.

Religion now has no place in public life, and no religion or creed should receive any special consideration or accommodation. That's politically correct (PC) thinking in Québec and TROC. Or at least it was, until a few years ago, when Muslims started demanding the "right" to pray in the streets, have Islamic religious instruction in public schools, and force their womenfolk to cover all or parts of their bodies against the gaze of infidels. See "Hijab, niqab, burqa -- what's the difference?".

Of course what's fair for the followers of the Prophet must also be fair for the Jews, Sikhs...just about everyone except Christians. Freedom of religion, dontcha know! It's PC! And so Canadians are treated to the spectacle of turban-clad Mounties, looking like extras in Carry On Up The Khyber. Walt is waiting for a Sikh to bring a human rights complaint (or a lawsuit, if in the USA) to force the NHL to let him wear a turban instead of a helmet.

Soccer, of course, is a different story. Soccer players don't wear helmets because -- let's be real -- how can you hurt your head playing a slow sissy game like "football"? Well, OK, you could get beaned by a viciously kicked ball, but wearing anything on your head is still not done... unless you're a Sikh. Along with his holy drawers and kirpan, a Sikh should be able to wear his turban, they say, because it's part of his religion. And anyone who objects is a racist bigot!

So what, said the Québec Soccer Federation? A few weeks back the QSF passed a bylaw forbidding the wearing of turbans or anything else while playing the beautiful game. Accusations of religious discrimination and being less-than-PC immediately emanated from the lamestream media and swivel-eyed loons of the human rights industry. To which Pauline Marois, the PQ premier of Québec replied, so what?! This is Québec and we'll follow our own customs and values.

A couple of weeks later, following condemnation from the Canadian Soccer Federation and a statement from the international governing body (FIFA) that it didn't care one way or the other, the QSF backed down. But there remains in QC the very strong sentiment that accommodation of religious and ethnic minorities has gone too far.

Having determined the direction from which the political wind is blowing, the Québec Minister of Citizenship, Bernard Drainville, has announced that he's pushing ahead with a long-promised "Charter of Values" which (he thinks) will resolve the problem of religious accommodation, once and for all. He pointed to a public opinion poll that asked whether Québecois think religious accommodation is still an important problem. Two-thirds of the 1506 respondents polled said yes.

When asked whether doing away with "unreasonable accommodations" would promote a more integrated society, 70%. Said M Drainville, "We do want this debate to be about what unites us, not what divides us. What unites us. And I do think equality between men and women, between all citizens notwithstanding origin, religion, mother tongue -- I do think these are important values if we want to build in Québec a united society."

A united society... Wouldn't that be something... If putting an end to extreme political correctness in Québec works, perhaps TROC could try it! And if it works in Canada -- as if! -- perhaps the other half of North America could have a go. We could even give the principle a name... something like "majority rule"!