Quebec has passed Bill 84 which mandates that newcomers adhere to the province’s values, presenting it as an alternative to Canada’s multiculturalism model.
The Quebec legislature passed the law on Wednesday, requiring immigrants to embrace the common culture of the province.
Among the values listed in the legislation are the protection of the French language, gender equality and secularism.
“There is a growing debate, not only in Canada but in other immigrant-receiving countries in the developed economies, on whether they must adapt to local customs, or if society must accommodate their practices, even if some may be antithetical to Western values,” immigration lawyer Sergio Karas told True North.
The provincial government has been critical of Canada’s continued push for multiculturalism, which promotes cultural diversity and does not value one culture over another.
“Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel famously said that multiculturalism had failed,” said Karas.
“Given the large number of immigrants and refugees who come to Canada from countries where societal and religious practices may contravene established norms in the West, it’s important that they integrate and that they do not bring with them practices that we consider abhorrent.”
The legislation known as An Act respecting integration into the Québec nation is the province’s answer to the national model, which it claims hurts social cohesion and lays the groundwork for civil unrest.
The new law will allow Quebec to withhold funding for certain groups and events that it perceives does not uphold the province’s common culture.
Critics of Bill 84 say it’s an attempt to assimilate newcomers and will rouse the growing anti-immigrant sentiment in Quebec and throughout the country.
“The situation in Quebec is unique because since the confederation they have been guarding the French language zealously, sometimes with extreme measures, and they give preference to French-speaking immigrants,” said Karas.
“Even so, they feel that some aspects of immigration have a negative impact on their society and the legislation is an attempt to get in front of this issue. The question will be whether the law would survive a constitutional challenge.”