A Charter For The French Separatist
Bernard Drainville promises equality, but what does the Parti Quebecois really want to prove with Bill 60? I believe that we should be watching very carefully on what our government thinks is in our best interest.
the primacy of the french language
Drainville said the bill's purpose is to create “ a society which gives itself a clear foundation and determining fundamental values is crucial for the future.” Drainville adds, “ ....The bill is fair, and reasonable, and well balanced, and it is the right equilibrium between respecting individual rights and affirming collective and common values...”
Yet without consideration of people's right and beliefs Bill 60, Chapter V, point 16, asks that all those who wish to take an absence of work due to religious practice should really reconsider. Of course, if you are taking frequent and long absences off work you should respect the establishment for which you work for. I think we can all understand that. I know more then one person who find themselves working on either Christmas or New Years, now that I think of it, we could use a bill for that.
If you doubt the government body is serious, Bill 60, Chapter IV, point 14 clearly states “After a first failure by a personnel member of a public body to comply with the restriction on wearing a religious symbol, dialogue must be engaged in and before any disciplinary measure is taken by the public body, in order to remind the person of their obligations, and foster their compliance.”
What I find most absurd is government defining their own powers, “The Government may make regulations to facilitate the implementation of this Charter, including regulations defining the terms and expressions used in the Charter...” Chatper X, Point 36.
The opposing parties did not go unheard on the presentation of this Bill.
Thomas Muclair, NDP Leader says Bill 60 does not reflect who Quebecers are.
Liberal MNA Philippe Couillard says the PQ’s values charter sends a message to the world of “look how weak we are” and continues to say that the bill is “A message of discrimination on the way you dress... I am ashamed to hear that and hope not to hear that again...”