A brief from the English Montreal School Board to the Quebec National Assembly Committee on Bill 60, the

proposed Charter Affirming The Values Of Secularism And The Religious Neutrality of The State, As Well As The Equality Of Men And Women, And The Framing Of Accommodation Requests. Preamble With a youth and adult sector population of more than 33,000 students, the English Montreal School Board (EMSB) is the largest English public school board in Quebec. Established on July 1, 1998, when the province created new boards along linguistic lines, our network consists of 77 schools and centres. The EMSB serves the following fourteen (14) boroughs and six (6) municipalities: Ahuntsic/Cartierville, Anjou, Cte-des-Neiges/Notre-Dame-deGrce, Mercier/Hochelaga Maisonneuve, Montral-Nord, Outremont, Plateau Mont-Royal, Rivire-des-Prairies/Pointe-aux-Trembles, Rosemont/Petite Patrie, Saint-Laurent, Saint-Lonard, Sud-Ouest, Ville Marie, Villeray/SaintMichel/Parc-Extension; Mont-Royal, Montral-Est, Westmount, Cte-SaintLuc, Hampstead et Montral-Ouest. Introduction The EMSB thanks you for this opportunity to submit our views and recommendations on draft Bill 60 to the Parliamentary Committee of the National Assembly of Quebec. Since our inception, enrolment in the youth sector has dropped from a high of 27,000 to just fewer than 20,000. The language laws, Bill 101 and latterly Bill 114, are chiefly responsible for this. We respect the laws, and do what the government insists we do refuse access to students without English eligibility. We have adhered to Bill 118, a law responding to the diversity of moral and religious expectations in Quebec.

Bill 60 is different, legislation we cannot support nor enforce. To do so would be contrary to both the mandate your Ministry of Education has given us, as well as contrary to our mission and values. The mission of the EMSB is to support its schools and centres in their efforts to educate students within a caring, safe and inclusive learning community. The EMSB:

Recognizes and values the diversity of its community; Provides all students with the opportunity to develop their talents and achieve their personal best; Recognizes the skills and competencies of its employees and support their continuous professional development; Encourages collaboration among the various educational partners; Uses resources effectively and innovatively to help schools and centres focus on the mission of instruction, socialization, and qualification; Encourages lifelong learning and critical thinking. The EMSB mission fosters the development of educated and responsible persons who will assume their position as active members of a democratic society. Therefore the goals and objectives of Bill 60 are not coherent with the mission and values of the EMSB. BILL 118 The EMSB wishes to emphasize that under Bill 118, a law responding to the diversity of moral and religious expectations in Quebec, we continue to provide a school environment which reflects diversity and pluralism. According to Bill 118, which was adopted by the PQ government in 2000 after public school boards were deconfessionalized, activities sponsored by schools must be inclusive, pluralistic and educational. As stated in Bill 118s introductory message: They (schools) should not only introduce young people to the basic values of Quebec society and culture, but they should also make them aware of the richness of diversity. Again, the social guideline of Bill 118 states: Religion must not find its place in schools by creating barriers, but instead by being a factor of cohesion, tolerance and openness. It can and must promote coexistence in an ever more pluralistic society. The activities in our EMSB schools have,

over the years, adopted this principal, and we expose our students to various customs from the main faiths of Quebec. By educating our students in religious diversity and pluralism we have reduced ignorance and prejudice, and created an atmosphere of respect and acceptance of diversity. The EMSB is in fact recognized by the MELS for designing activities coherent with the structure of Bill 118 and the growth and development of the spiritual care and guidance and community involvement service. We are the model in Quebec. As a school board we learn to live, respect and understand the differences of others. From the year 2000, the EMSB has implemented Bill118 while respecting the Quebec Charter of Human Rights. We have invented and developed projects and resources with a pluralistic and inclusive educational approach. Since 2000, the EMSB has worked hard to support school environments that reflect diversity and pluralism in accordance with Bill 118. Consequently, the schools of the EMSB have held, and will continue to hold multi-faith celebrations,and encourage activities and clubs that honour and respect our multi-cultural society, in line with Bill 118, while focused on the needs of the students. A course called Ethics and Religious Culture (ERC) is mandatory in all elementary and high schools in Quebec, according to the Basic School Regulation. Its aim is to adopt a descriptive approach to the diverse religious heritage of Quebec while promoting a culture of dialogue among students. We wish to point out all of this to illustrate how Bill 118 is working. Via our Spiritual Community Animation Service we have been able to enhance cross-cultural understanding and enable our students to learn about and respect different cultures. Bill 60 does exactly the opposite of what Bill 118 set out to do. Both have rules associated with them. While we had to adjust to Bill 118 and still do to his day, we ensure that our schools and centres adhere to it. Bill 118 is a fair law that does not discriminate against anyone. It is an example of legislation that we can apply across the board and still foster inherent values among our children.

Response to Bill 60

The EMSB wishes to convey how, as an educational institution which fosters respect among our students, we can in no way support draft Bill 60. Article 4 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, states that every person has a right to the safeguard of his dignity, honour and reputation. This certainly is not reflected in Bill 60. We therefore agree with legal opinions which have already been made to the effect that the content of Bill 60 violates the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. We wish to make it clear that should it be passed by the National Assembly, we cannot accept specifically those provisions of Bill 60 which relate to the wearing of objects such as headgear, clothing, jewelry or other adornments which, by their conspicuous nature, overtly indicate a religious affiliation If enacted, Bill 60 will force individuals to choose between government employment and a desire to wear religious apparel. It is a personal choice to wear such apparel. The EMSB values the diversity of our students and staff, and respects their personal and religious rights which are guaranteed both by the Canadian and Quebec Charters of Rights. We cannot be party to a proposed legislation which, if passed, runs contrary to what we teach our students insofar as tolerance and respect of individual rights and religious freedoms are concerned. Since when does wearing a symbol equate with abusing authority? We consider this to be intolerant secularism. There is no question that secularism is becoming a religion which is being imposed on a pluralistic society. In a misguided attempt to demonstrate that the state is neutral, this legislation would show that Quebec is no longer open to pluralism. By dictating what cannot be worn, the law supposedly removes unwanted values. Bill 60 states that public institutions must adopt policies to implement the Charter, and post those policies on their websites. We cannot, in all good conscience, instruct any of our administrators to discipline an employee for quietly following their religious beliefs. This is simply not something that we find acceptable in what we still believe is a free and democratic society. Bill 60 seems to be trying to address a problem that does not even exist.

Among our staff, there are some who do in fact wear headgear, clothing, jewelry or other adornments consistent with their respective religions and beliefs. This is something to celebrate; not to be ashamed of. We lose our prejudices through exposure to different cultures and religions, whereby stereotypes are broken down. The underlying hypothesis of Bill 60 is that the wearing of religious apparel by teachers-among others- equates with the dissemination of religious beliefs to their students. Teachers are professionals who know that they are required to place their own convictions aside in order to offer various perspectives in the classroom. Furheen Ahmed is a teacher at Westmount High School. She was born in Montreal and in fact attended the same school she now teaches at. Ms. Ahmad is a Muslim and wears a hijab. This in absolutely no way impacts negatively upon her objectivity, her professionalism or her teaching abilities. Allow us to quote Ms. Ahmed: This proposal makes me really sad. It feels as if I am not welcome in my own home. I am a born and raised Montrealer, so this is my home. It is my right as a Canadian and a Quebecer to be free and to practice my religion. If it does not conflict with what Im doing in the classroom, then I do not see the issue. I would love for someone to show me one instance when a doctor wearing a turban, a teacher wearing a hijab or another civil servant wearing a crucifix has negatively influenced the people they served. Equally upset with this are her students. I dont agree with this, said one. There is nothing wrong expressing your religion; it doesnt make you any different. Everyone is the same and it is wrong what the government is doing, said another. For any students who are wearing a religious symbol, Bill 60 is sending them a message that they are not equal to their peers. Do they not have equal choices in their future as to which career to fill? As Ms. Ahmed states: You are a young person who now has a whole bunch of doors shut. Psychologically, that hurts our young people. You want to have a sense of belonging.

We again quote Ms. Ahmed who remarked to us: This charter is allowing people to voice really terrible things. How can you tell somebody from 5 p.m. to 5 a.m. go ahead and be a Muslim, but from the moment you wake up and go to work until 5 pm you are not Muslim anymore and you cannot practice anymore ? How is that possible? It is not the way Islam works! It is not how other faiths work! We teach our kids not to make generalizations. Yet the government is putting people in boxes. ... Were being told that when we wear a hijab or a kippa, we are less professional than our colleagues. Instead of being evaluated based on how I teach, a snap judgment is being made about me because of what I wear. Another one of our teachers, Sara Rosa from John Caboto Academy in Ahuntsic, wears a large crucifix around her neck, something that would not be permitted if the Charter is adopted. My belief is that we are still free people in this province and have the right to practice our faith according to our commitments, she says. My faith defines who I am and how I live my life. According to the Canadian Charter of Rights, we have freedom of religion. We do not have to hide in our homes to practice our faith. We have the right to demonstrate our allegiance to God. If people are entitled to display tattoos, esoteric symbols (and other things), then why would I not be free to carry a symbol that represents me? Part of people's basic rights is the freedom to practice their religion. We spoke with another teacher who is a Ba"ale Teshuvah Orthodox Jew meaning that he is a Jew from a secular background who became religiously observant. For the past year he has been teaching in one of our East End schools, where there are no Jewish students at all. Besides a kippa, he also has a tzizit a four-cornered, tasseled jersey worn by Jewish males as part of the Jewish dress code. We could not ask him to remove this head covering or garment, nor should we. In the eight years he has been with us, nobody has complained. If anything, students have asked him why he wears these things. As The Montreal Teachers Association emphasizes, the secular nature of our school system and the equality of men and women are clearly reflected in the Quebec education curriculum. The acceptance and respect of cultural and religious diversity is at the core of what we teach.

For example, in the Broad Area of Learning of Citizenship and Community Life, the Quebec Education Program states that a culture of peace must be a focus of a students development. Explicitly, it refers to a recognition of the principle of equal rights for all and of the individuals and groups to express their differences; recognition of the negative consequences of stereotypes, discrimination and exclusion. Bill 60 is in direct contradiction with the values that teachers are required by law to impart on their students. Additionally, this law is in contradiction to the teacher obligations under the Education Act. Section 22 (1), a teacher shall take the appropriate means to foster respect for human rights in his students. EMSB staff is hurt and confused by what this charter means to both their colleagues here and throughout Quebecs public sector. They also feel strongly that students from diverse ethnic backgrounds should have just as much a right to have role models in front of them in the classrooms as any other student. They worry about what this will mean for them in their future and what will happen to them once they graduate and enter the job market. The proposed Charter of Values goes against our values. We are a multiethnic school board and Montreal is a multi-ethnic city and we need to reflect the values of everyone. This is a charter of exclusion. The fact that we have a proposal such as this from our government is deeply disturbing. We consider this an affront to human rights and human dignity, and we believe it sends a message that is opposite to the message of respect that we try to convey to our students every day. We have teachers who wear religious symbols to work, not to mention students and this in no way affects their ability to lead. When linguistic school boards were established in 1998, Premier Marois was the Minister of Education. As recently reported in the media, in 1998 with immigration on the rise, there was a concerted effort to open the doors of the schools to students and teachers of different ethnic and religious backgrounds. A School for the Future: Policy Statement on Educational Integration and Intercultural Education, signed by Mme. Marois in 1998, promoted Zero Exclusion , and the recognition that diversity in terms of family background, religious or cultural identity is itself one of our shared values.

The policy statement also highlighted the need for - and the challenge of increasing diversity in the teaching profession: The credibility of pretensions to openness and ethno-cultural and religious diversity relies heavily on the visibility of this diversity within the school staff, the policy statement reads. But, in many school boards and most educational institutions, the staff remains ethno-culturally homogeneous it seems appropriate to ask school boards and colleges to make sure that their hiring system include no rules or practices that could have a discriminatory effect. ...and to urge educational establishments to encourage young immigrants to consider careers as teachers. We ask how is it possible for a political position to veer in such an opposite direction? The link to bullying In 2012, the Quebec government adopted Bill 56, which required that school boards ensure that their schools provide an environment that allows students to develop their full potential, free from any form of bullying or violence. The school boards were deemed responsible for the commitments made in that regard. Public and private educational institutions were also required to adopt and implement an anti-bullying and anti-violence plan and designate a person to implement it. The text of the legislation places great emphasis on prevention. Each institutions plan must include prevention measures and the actions to be taken when an act of bullying or violence is observed. Assistance must be provided to the victim and further acts of bullying or violence must be prevented. Although perpetrators must be penalized, professional support must be offered to them and their families to ensure that they do not repeat that behaviour and victimize others. We find it ironic that a government which still stands behind this important piece of legislation would subsequently go ahead and introduce Bill 60, which if we must be blunt, gives a government endorsement to bullying. We see Bill 60, in fact, as a bullying tactic. In speaking to leaders of the Muslim community, they felt that what this does is allow citizens to become vigilantes. The intolerant among us now have tacit support from the government to carry on their ways.

We have all been horrified by the incidents of racism and xenophobia which has permeated our society since discussion around the Charter began. This proposed legislation brings out the worst in Quebec society. Verbal and physical assaults on persons of minority faith have increased, and tension and aggression increases. In our History courses we teach our students about countries which have and still do carry out programs targeting different minorities. We tell our students how shameful it is in all of these instances that there are so many bystanders who choose to do nothing. Yet a few months ago, Quebecers watched footage of a woman with a hijab being verbally assaulted on a busand nobody came to her aid. They just sat and watched. What do you think our students learn from that type of behavior? Bullying escalates from verbal, to name calling and finally physical violence. This is bullying in its worse form if this law is passed, we anticipate there will be more incidents of this nature. An atmosphere of fear is being spread fear among those individuals who wear objects such as headgear, clothing, jewelry or other adornments which, by their conspicuous nature, overtly indicate a religious affiliation. We see Bill 60 as a bullying facilitator which seeks to eliminate the wearing of religious symbols in the public sector and deprives individuals of rights recognized as fundamental in all non totalitarian societies. Individuals will be forced to choose between government employment and a desire to wear religious apparel. It is a personal choice to wear such apparel. The EMSB has zero tolerance for acts of bullying in our schools. We see school violence as both a public health and a societal issue. The schools and school system are part of the solution and cannot solve this in isolation. Our government must be a partner with us in promoting safe schools. We are afraid that Bill 60 will produce an entirely new generation of bullies. Schools will be left to suffer the consequences and pick up the pieces. There is also the matter of cyber bullying. Bill 60 has already found its way on to the internet. It can only get worse. Recommendation

10

The EMSB recommends that the Quebec government must retract the proposed Bill 60 in its entirety. Conclusion In conclusion, Bill 60 essentially creates a brand new role for school boards, one which the EMSB does not intend to be party to: School boards will be obliged to police its teachers, monitoring them for non- compliance with the restrictions imposed by the legislation, issuing warnings, imposing disciplinary measures including dismissals if required, defending against resultant grievances in arbitration hearings.........a new way to spend time and tax dollars that would be better spent to improve student success. School boards would have to change their hiring practices so that noncompliant candidates would be refused interviews for applicable positionsunless they renounced their religious beliefs during the working day. These candidates for teacher positions will likely include some of our own former students, who had aspired to pursue a teaching career without having to sacrifice their own religious beliefs. School boards would have to also screen all suppliers of services to ensure that they too were complying with the law- more bureaucracy and squandering of already diminishing resources, School boards would also have to write up new policy and procedure statements describing how they would ensure compliance and invoke consequences on transgressors. Private schools in Quebec even those subsidized by the governmentwould be exempt from the legislation, making religious private school even more attractive to parents and students of religious minorities (a 2010 study concluded that 80 of 106 religious schools in Quebec were subsidized for more than $105 million. The public school system in Quebec is already on

11

an uneven playing field with the private system, and this situation would further strengthen the private system to the detriment of school board enrolment. If Bill 60 causes an increase of enrolment in private schools, this would foster cells of insular religious environments instead of society with a broader understanding and acceptance of different religious traditions and customs. Using the false rationale employed by the legislation that persons in a position of authority be prohibited from wearing clothing of a religious nature, it is very conceivable that in the same vein, ardent supporters of this law would advocate prohibiting non-compliant students from aspiring to run for Class President or for Student Council, or to volunteer for hallway monitoring or for student mentoring, or to work for Sun Youth as bike patrollers assisting local police forces, as these would all be perceived as roles conferring a degree of authority over others. Is this a Quebec for all? We wish to conclude by sharing with you this part of our resolution which was adopted by our Council of Commissioners on November 27, 2013: BE IT RESOLVED THAT the English Montreal School Board wishes to make it clear that it cannot accept the provisions of draft Bill 60 which relate to the wearing of objects such as headgear, clothing, jewelry or other adornments which, by their conspicuous nature, overly indicate a religious affiliation, and shall not implement any of the related elements of Bill 60 should it be passed by the National Assembly.