People rally against Quebec’s Bill 21, which prohibits some public sector workers from wearing religious symbols at work in Chelsea, Que., in December, 2021.Justin Tang/The Canadian Press
Stephen Brown is the CEO of the National Council of Canadian Muslims. Dr. Nadia Hasan is an assistant professor at the School of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at York University.
On June 16, we passed a shameful milestone: it has been five years since Quebec’s Bill 21, officially known as An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State, was passed into law. That law bans Quebeckers who wear religious symbols (such as a turban, hijab or kippah) from being employed in several public-sector jobs.
This was done in the name of the “neutrality” of the state – but it has done little more than produce second-class citizenship.
In one way, it sounds great. Who doesn’t want a neutral state? But in reality, “neutrality” is defined by the Quebec government in deeply racist and xenophobic ways. For instance, while the bill demands the “neutrality” of Quebec’s public servants by making those who wear hijabs, turbans and kippahs – a largely racialized population – choose between their faith and their careers, it still allows for workplaces such as hospitals and government buildings to display crosses.
The CAQ government also insists, with little proof, that the law’s so-called neutrality has led to social harmony and integration. But a new study by the National Council of Canadian Muslims on the work experiences of Muslim women in Quebec since Bill 21 indicates that the opposite is true. More than half of the 411 Muslim women surveyed for the study have experienced some sort of racist or Islamophobic harassment at work. Seventeen per cent have experienced physical aggression at the hands of their supervisors, colleagues and/or clients.
In fact, the study, one of the largest of its kind since Bill 21 passed, found that Muslim women face higher rates of discrimination and racism at every stage of their employment journey versus the general population in Quebec. For instance, more than 50 per cent of women reported an increase in questions about their religious identity in job interviews since Bill 21 became law, compared to less than 6 per cent of the general population. Similarly, 25 per cent of women reported that their religious identity had come up in conversations about career advancement since Bill 21 became law, compared to 5 per cent of the general population surveyed.
Are we surprised? After five years of Bill 21, the evidence shows that it’s having a disproportionately negative impact on religious minorities – especially Muslim women who wear a hijab. It was obvious from the start, as so many civil-liberties and community groups pointed out: When people are treated as less than equal, and when discrimination against them is legalized and legitimized, their lives deteriorate.
In fact, when justifying Bill 21 in a 2019 interview with Radio-Canada, Quebec Premier François Legault stated that “sometimes you have to give a little to the majority” (translated from French). The “little” he gave was nothing less than our rights.
The negative impacts of this decision were detailed by many of the women who were surveyed in the NCCM report. Sixty-four per cent expressed mistrust of the government, and many conveyed a feeling of dread, as they worried about which of their rights might be taken away next by this government.
Eighty-eight per cent of Muslim women surveyed also felt that Quebec has become a less welcoming place to live. Ninety per cent felt that it is a less welcoming place to work. For this growing majority, Quebec is becoming unlivable; 71 per cent of Muslim women surveyed are considering leaving the province altogether, and 73 per cent have considered or have already applied for work outside of Quebec. Sixty-six per cent of Muslim women are considering applying for work within Muslim-owned businesses and community organizations, leading to concerns around the ghettoization of the community and further social discord.
So much for integration and social harmony.
The bill, as is well known by now, circumvented Charter-protected rights through the use of an emergency section in the Constitution called the notwithstanding clause. The Constitution also sets out that the clause expires after five years, and so Quebec would have to renew the notwithstanding clause by this month. The CAQ government did so in May.
Again, Mr. Legault justifies all this by effectively declaring that the path to achieving what he calls “social peace” lies in rendering minorities invisible by taking away their rights. The National Council of Canadian Muslims’ study, alongside a mounting body of evidence, shows that cornering and bullying a minority into a vulnerable position is anything but harmonious.
Indeed, while it is unclear what crisis of state neutrality Bill 21 was trying to solve, the evidence shows that it has certainly created some.