Let’s defang Bill 96
On October 13, I penned an opinion piece in the pages of the Montreal Gazette on Bill 96. It remains clear to me that this bill needlessly sows confusion regarding the eligibility of hundreds of thousands of anglophone Quebecers to receive health care in English, and would also prove a major hindrance to Quebec companies seeking to tap into the vast potential of the global economy.
My opinion is that, by and large, this even more severe and counterproductive version of Bill 101 should be shelved. However, this ship has sailed and it is virtually certain that the Legault government will not back down from enacting some version of Bill 96. Hence, faced with such prospects, the only thing we can realistically strive for at this point is damage control. And there are indeed several ways this proposed legislation could be made less bad.
Let’s take the example of English health services, which is possibly the most egregious and despicable aspect of Bill 96. The legal codification of the concept of historic anglophone minority status as a criterion that determines one’s eligibility to receive services in English has been a source of great uncertainty among my anglophone Quebecer friends, and for good reason. Given that the Charter of the French Language overrides other laws, a sensible government would immediately recognize that it is playing with fire. Meanwhile, CAQ MNA Christopher Skeete has been adamant that Bill 96 does nothing to limit the availability of these services to all English-speaking Quebecers.
If the government is truly intent on securing English health care services for all anglophone Quebecers, it should simply amend Bill 96 to include an exception to its general provisions. To make matters even easier, the language it should use is already featured in Quebec’s Act Respecting Health Services and Social Services: « English-speaking persons are entitled to receive health services and social services in the English language. »
Quebec’s companies, and its economy in general, would also be better off if Bill 96 were defanged of the severe limitations it puts on firms wanting to hire bilingual talent. In these modern times, there’s no getting around the fact that our economies are globally intertwined, and that English is the lingua franca of business. It would be perfectly feasible to amend Bill 96 in order to assert that these limits do not apply to Quebec firms with substantial revenues coming from outside Quebec, say 33% or more. And why not extend this exemption to businesses for which anglophones represent over 60% of sales?
Obviously, these are arbitrarily chosen numbers, and we could debate endlessly about the proper threshold to set. My point is simply that it is possible to carve out exceptions and limit some of the worst legislative excesses contained in this bill, and that men and women of good will would be well-advised to put forward their own recommendations. Politics is the art of the possible, and we should be realistic in our expectations.
Now, let me say that promoting French as the language spoken by the majority of Quebecers is in many ways a noble cause. However, using repressive tools and limiting access to essential services for hundreds of thousands of our fellow Quebecers is precisely the wrong way to go about it.
In his inaugural address, Premier Legault expressed his wish that 90% of Quebecers graduate from high school, with the current rate being 82%. As things stand, francophones are lagging behind anglophone Quebecers when it comes to educational achievement. Realistically, in order to reach this 90% target, the French population would have to catch up to anglophones.
Interestingly, Quebec’s economic history clearly shows that this would be the best way to make French attractive to allophones and anglophones, and thus to promote French. Why don’t we take action and make it a reality instead of trampling on the rights of our fellow Quebecers?
Michel Kelly-Gagnon est président et directeur général de l’IEDM. Il signe ce texte à titre personnel.