It may be that the charter of Quebec values never becomes law. It may be that this is a trial balloon, a little late-summer silliness, a taunt, tease or test, with no purpose but provocation.
But even if the charter never passes, this exercise has been useful. It says something about Quebec and its politicians, and Ottawa and its politicians. Consider this an early lesson as Canada鈥檚 political class prepares to return to school.
The P茅quistes are desperate for a wedge issue. Unpopular on the first anniversary of the election they won narrowly, they come up with this confection.
Of course, it鈥檚 all a distraction from real problems. In proposing to ban religious symbols among government employees, though, they are playing successfully to Quebec鈥檚 tribalism.
If the proposed charter 鈥� the details are promised in mid-September 鈥� does prohibit yarmulkes, crucifixes and kirpans, it will show once again, as Pierre Trudeau said, that Quebec is an adolescent society. It will show that Quebec, despite its richness of culture, is parochial.
Quebec likes to think it looks to Europe. If so, it is becoming less like Europe as a social democracy and more like Europe as an anxious democracy, worried about the challenges of diversity.
What has been particularly delicious in this is the defensiveness of Pauline Marois and friends. The most amusing has been Bernard Landry, that cranky political footnote who was premier before Quebecers mercifully voted him out.
Landry slammed the English media for its coverage of the social charter. Like a blowfish, he gushed about the record of tolerance and diversity in Quebec, as if it were the New Jerusalem.
It is true that blacks have succeeded in Quebec, from Jackie Robinson to Micha毛lle Jean. And it is true that Montreal, in particular, is home to ethnic minorities, including Italians, Haitians, Chinese and others. But Landry has a selective memory.
He forgets Jacques Parizeau鈥檚 attack on 鈥渄es votes ethniques鈥� after the sovereigntists lost the referendum in 1995. Or the unhappy experience of Jews in Quebec when universities imposed quotas and clubs imposed restrictions. It is curious, isn鈥檛 it, that Landry鈥檚 Quebec was the only jurisdiction in Canada ready to ban kids from wearing turbans playing soccer?
As much as we can thank the Parti Qu茅b茅cois for presenting a vision of a Little Quebec, we can thank them for smoking out federal politicians. This has been revealing.
From Prime Minister Stephen Harper, we have heard almost nothing on the secular charter, beyond that he doesn鈥檛 like it. From his minister for multiculturalism, the estimable Jason Kenney, there were a few discouraging words, but not what you might expect from a politician who once aligned himself with Chinese dissidents, in China.
From the minister of foreign affairs, who created the Office of Religious Freedom and talks about 鈥渢he dignity agenda,鈥� there has been no protest.
Suddenly, the Conservatives have lost their voice on this. Yes, we know; shutting up for them is about politics and avoiding a cat fight with Quebec. But if any party can afford a fight, with the least to lose, it is the Conservatives, who have few seats in the province.
From Thomas Mulcair, the leader of the official opposition, we have heard almost nothing. The much-heralded social democrat, once the voice of minorities, was silent at first. He thought about Quebec鈥檚 charter for a week and then, on reflection 鈥� as if he were sitting in that much-maligned chamber of sober second thought 鈥� he ruled, with ecclesiastical authority, that no, it wasn鈥檛 so great after all.
The only politician who has shown backbone is Justin Trudeau. Unlike Harper, he has everything to lose; he needs Quebec to put the Liberals back in business. Yet there he was the other day, calling the charter an affront. Perhaps the comparison with segregation in America was misplaced, but his criticism was spot on.
Refusing to hide, Trudeau has been independent and principled here. He has honoured the legacy of his father and of the Liberal party. Alone among our politicians in this little melodrama, he has shown some guts.
Andrew Cohen is a professor of journalism and international affairs at Carleton University.
