the Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ) recognizes the right of Quebec to amend the Constitution to include in it that Quebecers “form a nation” and that French is “the only official language”, but does not agree with the government on the legal scope of these modifications.
“We are very open to the inclusion, in the Constitution, of the concepts of nation and of the French language, like a little the motion of Bloc Quebecois did it. We have no particular stake in relation to that, ”declared the liberal spokesperson for the protection of the French language, Hélène David, in an interview with To have to. Public consultations on the reform of “Bill 101” open Tuesday at the National Assembly.
So far, the liberal leader Dominique Anglade had bypassed the questions on this subject. “I said I was going to come back, that we were going to come back [sur le sujet] before the consultations ”, she replied again last week when journalists asked her to clarify the liberal position on the constitutional offensive of the Legault government.
At the end of May, the government of Quebec has tabled its bill 96, which proposes to include the notion of nation in the Constitution. The legislative piece also provides for French to be listed there as “the only official language of Quebec” and “the common language of the nation of Quebec”.
In an interview, Ms. David said her party wants to remain “consistent”. ” [On va] continue to believe that Quebec is a nation and that it has French as an official language, ”she ruled. “For the moment, to put two concepts that the Liberal Party has already endorsed or created itself, whether it is the French language or the nation, us, that does not bother us, insofar as it is not a constitutional change like Meech Lake, ”she also said.
She added that section 45 – which provides that a legislature has exclusive jurisdiction to amend the constitution of its province – “repeats things that we ourselves have said. [au PLQ] ».
In this, the liberal reading of the constitutional offensive differs from that given by the Minister of Justice, Simon Jolin-Barrette. The latter considers that the approach proposed in Bill 96 “Is no less constitutional” than those allowing an amendment to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, for example, or requiring the unanimity of the members of the federation.
No funding concerns
In an interview, Ms. David also brushed aside the concerns of demographers who told Press, last week, that Bill 96 did not go far enough to curb the decline of the French language.
Guillaume Marois and Patrick Sabourin notably argued that English-speaking health and education institutions are overfunded in the metropolis, taking into account the demographic weight of English-speaking Quebecers.
“I am not ready to make the link, because the funding of colleges and universities is network funding and network funding is fair to everyone,” responded Hélène David, who was previously Minister responsible for Higher Education. This policy, she said, “does not differentiate between Anglophones and Francophones”, although “obviously, a CEGEP which gives more courses, which has more students. […] will have more funding ”.
The elected liberal also recalled that hospitals obtain their funding “by medical act”. “We don’t look at the color of the skin or the tongue. So if we want to define the MUHC in relation to the total number of native Anglophones, historical, well that means that we are closing roughly a MUHC that we funded ourselves and that Quebeckers are happy with, especially that we don’t have a lot of places in hospitals, ”she said.
She said she feared that a drop in funding could make universities more dependent on funding from foreign students, or even push them to consider privatization.
Extensive use of exemption provisions
Ms. David also said that she wondered about the use of the exemption provisions provided for in Bill 96, in particular because of “digital issues” and the powers granted to the Office québécois de la langue française. The OQLF could “go to computers, go to telephones to see if the company has regulations that are compliant, in French, etc.” », She listed.
“In these powers of excavation there are mingled the rights to private life provided for by the Charters. So […] Wouldn’t it be a good idea if certain sections of the bill were not exempted, because they conflict with privacy rights? She asked.
The Liberal MP did not want to say whether her party felt that the use of these provisions was justified in one place or another in the bill. “We will see as time goes on because there, they have taken a fairly comprehensive approach, we put everything under derogation,” she replied, urging the government not to use the gag for the adoption of this law. .
Dominique Anglade previously said in favor of the use of the derogatory clause to protect the French language, if it proves necessary.
Watch video
Reference-feedproxy.google.com