Where is the outrage over Quebec’s discriminatory law?

Want to see outrage these days? Mention any issue that even smacks of racism or prejudice and you will see Canadians respond with anger and passion.

Why has this energy not extended to Quebec’s Bill 21?

If there ever was a law that flies in the face of everything that social justice activists claim they stand for, it’s Quebec’s “Act Respecting the laicity of the State.” This law, which prohibits entire categories of public servants, including teachers, judges or police officers, from wearing religious symbols such as hijabs or turbans is an affront to anyone concerned about discrimination. Not only does it close the door to certain professions for many practicing Muslims and Sikhs, but it sends a clear signal that they are second-class citizens. Don’t just take my word for it.

In his ruling on the law, Quebec Superior Court Justice Marc-andré Blanchard outlined how the law “dehumanized those targeted.” As he explained: “these people feel ostracized and partially excluded from the Quebec public service … Bill 21 also sends the message to minority students wearing religious symbols that they must occupy a different place in society and that obviously the way of public education, at the level of preschool, primary and secondary does not exist for them.”

Quebec’s use of the notwithstanding clause, however, meant that there was little the judge could do beyond ruling on a few of the provisions around the edges.

Why has Bill 21 not brought Canadians to the streets? Why has it not been given the same attention as debates over the removal of the statues, the renaming of schools or the defunding of police?

I am not suggesting that these issues be abandoned, but why has a current provincial law which effectively allows state-sponsored discrimination not become one of the primary targets in our fight for a society free of prejudice?

Admittedly, the recent horrific murder of a Muslim family in London, Ont., has resulted in the media putting some pressure on our federal politicians to respond to Bill 21.

So far, none have taken up the cause and their tap dancing around the issue has been embarrassing to watch.

I understand the position that federal politicians find themselves. I worked for the federal Intergovernmental Affairs Minister in the sensitive period following the 1995 referendum and spent five years in the Prime Minister’s Office. Bill 21 is very popular among the francophone population in Quebec. Fighting it from the podium and in the courts is the political equivalent of entering a minefield. It has profound implications for national unity and electoral success in a crucial province.

That said, sometimes you simply need to do the right thing. Important human rights are at stake.

Part of the problem in standing up to Quebec is that it’s very difficult to do so when the rest of the country doesn’t really seem to care. Parties in Ottawa need to understand that nobody is impressed with their ostrich routine. They need to realize that supporting Bill 21 might gain them votes in Quebec, but it could cost them votes elsewhere.

So let’s send that message. And let’s do it with at least the same energy that we are putting into discussions about statues of our first prime minister.

(Federal parties) need to realize that supporting Bill 21 might gain them votes in Quebec, but it could cost them votes elsewhere