Quebec Liberals play politics and lose with face-covering ban

When the Quebec Liberals passed their religious neutrality bill last week, it was an attempt to fulfil an election promiseand quell a debate that's been flaring up in the province for the better part of a decade. Instead, it'sprompted protest and criticism from both sides of the debate.

Bill 62states that anyone giving or receiving public services must do so with their face uncovered. The law applies to municipal and provincial services, including public transit, health careand libraries.

As a province, Quebec has a unique relationship to secularism that dates back to the Quiet Revolution of the1960s, when Quebecers rejected the powerful grip of the Catholic Church.

The idea of legislating religious neutrality and providing a framework for requests for accommodation on religious grounds has beendebatedrepeatedly in Quebec's legislature.The challenge, though, has always beenactually setting the rules, including whothey targetand justhow far they extend into daily life.

• Justice minister apologizes for confusion around new face-covering law
• Face-covering law called a 'dog's breakfast' by author of landmark report

Successive governments have tried to address the issue, from Jean Charest's Liberals, who recruited Grard Bouchard and Charles Taylor in 2007to head a commission on the reasonable accommodation of religious and cultural minorities, to the Parti Qubcois(PQ) under Pauline Marois, which proposed a secular charterthat would have prohibited public servants from wearing obvious religious symbols.

That proposal died on the order paper when the last election was called in 2014.

A few months later, in June 2015, the new Liberal government tabled Bill 62. It sat on the back burner for more than two years.

But with another provincial election now just a year away, the Liberalsput the bill to a voteamidpressure from political rivals who have accused Premier Philippe Couillard of being soft on identity issues.

Couillard pressed to act

Franois Legault's Coalition Avenir Qubec(CAQ),in particular, hastaken a hard line on questions of Quebec identity and has gained traction in the polls. Legault hascalled for tighter borders andfewer immigrants, andwants tobanreligious symbols for public sector employees.

"[The Liberals are] a party that doesn't like to deal with identity issues, which has tried to avoid them historically," said Daniel Sale, a political science professor at Concordia University in Montreal.

"Nowthey sort of felt pushed in a corner: they dealt with it, and they are dealing with it, in a rather bungled way."

Now that Bill 62 is law, the Liberals are facing criticism from all sides.

The governing party's two main opponents the CAQ and the PQ argue the law doesn't go far enough. The CAQsays the government should have had the courage to banmore religious symbols,and the PQsays the Liberals made it too easy to opt out of the law for religious reasons.

The left-leaning Qubec Solidaire also voted against the law, calling it "absurd and impossible to apply." The party also tabled a motion this week to debate the removalthe crucifix that hangs in the National Assembly, but it was rejected.

The law is also being slammed by leaders in the rest of Canada, as well as by Muslim groups, civil rights organizations and city mayors,who say it is discriminatory and unfairly targets Muslim women.

• How Quebec's face-covering ban stacks up to laws elsewhere around the globe

When the bill was first proposed,it only applied to provincial services, but an amendment made in Augustextended the bill to municipal services, including libraries and public transit. That's when the confusion began.

"When someone with a niqab arrives with their children, are we going to tell them, 'You aren't entering into the bus, or we're not giving you services'?" Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre asked last summer.

'They are not satisfying anyone'

By passing a law with less reach than the PQ's charter, the Liberals may have been trying to appeasecriticswho say they are not doing enough when it comes to ensuring religious neutrality, and also those who say alawlike this is simplyunnecessaryand discriminatory.

"It's not going to help them. On the contrary, because they are not satisfying anyone," Salesaid. "They're certainly not satisfying the pro-diversity people, and they're certainly not satisfying people who are perhaps more militant or more ardent, [who want to] curtail immigration."

The Liberals now admit they had trouble communicating their planand explaining the rules, particularly around public transit. Quebec Justice Minister StphanieVallecreated confusion last week aroundwhether or not a veiled woman would be able to ride a busin light of the requirement for theface to be uncovered.

On Tuesday,Valle tried to clarify the rules and seemed to backtrack.

A Muslim woman wearing a niqab or burka would only be required to uncover her face to take public transit if a photo ID is required not for the duration of ride.

"I'm sorry that it wasn't as clear," she saidin releasing the guidelines Tuesday. "Maybe what I'm doing today I should have done the day after we adopted the bill."

Bill 62: How Quebec''s face-covering ban will work

7 years ago

Duration 2:00

Quebec's Bill 62 was immediately controversial because it seemed to target Muslim women wearing the niqab. Lawmakers have now clarified how the bill will work. Here's a rundown of what it is, who's affected and what happens next.

The confusion opened her up to further criticism from the CAQ's Nathalie Roy, who called Valle's change of tune "a mess" and a "comedy act."

The government wanted to address a long-standing debate before Quebecers go to the polls next fall. Instead, it stirred up divisions once again, and it finds itself caught in the middle.

• ANALYSIS|Trudeau reluctant to reveal too much on Quebec's face-covering law