Since the announcement of Quebec’s language law, Bill 96 a new amendment to the Charter of the French Language, different community and advocacy groups highlighted that the bill lacks the ability to consider all the diversity found in Quebec.

Youth for Youth Quebec (Y4Y) President, Madeleine Lawler said, “It’s kind of wild because a . . .

whole bill dedicated to making non-francophones have better French skills, and yet it doesn’t really reflect how non-francophones think they can get better French skills.”

She adds that although it is important for people to assimilate to the French language and French culture, it should be done in a way that makes people personally want to, rather than feel it is being forced on them. She points out that for the long run the focus should be on changing someone’s personal preference in wanting to learn the French language and creating an affection towards it.

Bill 96 stems from the original charter Bill 101 which was first proposed in 1970. The bill sought to make French the normal and everyday language of Quebec. The bill initially targeted commercial signs. The law prohibited all commercial signs in Quebec from featuring any other language besides French. This received backlash from the English and minority communities at the time. The objectives, as stated in the bill are to protect Quebec culture through the preservation of the French language within the province.

According to Lawler, young anglophones by large are open to French and want to learn it, and think bilingualism is a great asset. As a generation that went to school under Bill 101, she said they only ever lived in the after. One of the main concerns around the debate around the “historic anglophone” is that it will make certain groups that are “already vulnerable and in precarious positions more vulnerable.”

As a youth advocate, Lawler sees that the bill “lacks sort of the youth perspective and doesn’t necessarily address the existing linguistic needs with the group and might create some new artificial divisions.”

Listening to people’s concerns she sees that this bill resulted in the youth feeling nervous about job security, and about having access to their choice of schools.

In addition, the English-speaking Quebec community has picked up on aspects of the bill that pose limitations to accessing services in the language they prefer.

The new bill, while also creating barriers, is also protected under the notwithstanding clause, which means “it takes somebody’s ability away to contest the application of that law on constitutional grounds,” said Arthur Ayers, President of Regional Association of West Quebecers.

Speaking from a lawyer’s perspective, Ayers said it is not that the notion of the notwithstanding clause is unusual, rather he explains, “if you do it systematically all the time, well, this is a veiled autocracy. It should be very specific and extremely exceptional, not this.”

The bill is aimed at immigrants who do not fall under the umbrella of being “historical anglophones” said Ayers, meaning someone who has grown up, or gone to school in English or has English ancestry. It is made to ensure and integrate immigrants and make sure they speak French, but done “negatively and coercively, as opposed to encouraging,” said Ayers.

The use of the term “historic anglophones” made by Premier François Legault led the Quebec Community Groups Network (QCGN) to take action on Oct. 28 and they published an open letter to the Premier, which now has over 1500 signatures. The QCGN is asking for the bill to be withdrawn, arguing it will do nothing to promote and protect the French language in Quebec.

The open letter addressed that Bill 96 should not be limiting access to government services whether for critical health and social services or the right to pay taxes in English. The “use of the ‘English-school-eligible’ category is grossly under-inclusive,” the letter said. As well as the fact that “it removes the right to receive services including health care in English. The letter stated that this is “utterly divorced from our community’s self-identification.”

Here in Shawville the MRC Pontiac has heard concerns from its community and released a petition proposing changes to Quebec’s language law, Bill 96. The petition requests amendments to any portion of the bill which would negatively impact anglophone or bilingual Quebecers. As well as ensuring students can study in the language of their choice.

The petition was sent to all 18 municipalities across Pontiac, once the MRC has the results it was said that MNA André Fortin will present the petition to the National Assembly in Quebec City.

Here are some of the concerns the petition addressed:

• “Remove from Bill 96 all articles that could have a negative impact on English-speaking citizens and bilingual communities.”

• “Ensure that students can study in the laguage of their choosing in the course of theirpost-secondary education.”

• “Ensure that the provisions of Bill 96 do not cause an administrative burden on small businesses and ensure a 50 per cent English/French employee ratio when hiring.”

Francophone concerns are very legitimate, and anglophone concerns are also very legitimate when it comes to linguistic issues said, Lawler. The problem she emphasizesis that the rhetoric lacks the collaborative aspect and an effort to understand both the french and anglo communities. “It’s not really a zero sum game,” she said, meaning instead of one entity winning and the other losing, both can win.

Register or subscribe to read this content

Thanks for stopping by! This article is available to readers who have created a free account or who subscribe to The Equity.

When you register for free with your email, you get access to a limited number of stories at no cost. Subscribers enjoy unlimited access to everything we publish—and directly support quality local journalism here in the Pontiac.

Register or Subscribe Today!