Indigenous Politics in Canada & Quebec Politics – Comprehensive Lecture Notes

Indigenous Politics in Canada (3-Video Sequence)

Demographic Overview

• Indigenous peoples = first inhabitants of the territory that became Canada. Their historical and modern presence is fundamental to Canada's identity.

• 2021 Census: $5\%$ of Canadian population (\approx $1.8\text{ million}$); up from $4.9\%$ in 2016.- Growth drivers:

  • Natural increase (higher fertility rates compared to the general Canadian population).

  • Increased self-identification (a reversal of the historic trend where Indigenous identity was often hidden due to discrimination, now more people are openly identifying).

• Three constitutionally recognized groups – these are distinct legal and cultural categories with unique histories and rights:

  • First Nations – this broad group includes all "Indians" who are not Métis or Inuit. They comprise hundreds of diverse nations across Canada.

  • Métis – people of mixed Indigenous and European (often French) ancestry; their political and cultural identity is historically centred on the Red River region (Manitoba/Saskatchewan). There's a debate over defining Métis identity: whether it's based on "one distant ancestor" (a broad genetic connection) vs. a specific Red River national identity (a distinct historical community).

  • Inuit – northern peoples who inhabit the Arctic regions of Canada; “Inuit” = “the people” in Inuktitut, their language. They have a unique cultural and linguistic heritage distinct from First Nations.

• Majority now live off-reserve & in urban areas. "Off-reserve" means they live outside of land designated as Indian Reserves for First Nations communities. This shift to urban living has significant implications for service delivery and cultural continuity.

Core Concept: Colonialism

• Defined as exploitation, domination and subjection of one people by another. In Canadian Indigenous politics, colonialism is a central concept because it explains the historical and ongoing power imbalances, land dispossession, and cultural suppression faced by Indigenous peoples at the hands of European settlers and the Canadian state.

• Two intertwined dimensions in Canada:

  1. Control of land/resources historically occupied by Indigenous nations. This involved taking over vast territories for settlement and resource extraction, often without consent or fair treaties.

  2. Control of people – involving a “civilising mission” under Eurocentric assumptions. This meant efforts to change Indigenous cultures, religions, and ways of life to conform to European norms, often through coercive means.

Royal Proclamation (1763)

• Landmark Crown–Indigenous framework; still legally valid (confirmed in 1982 Constitution, s.25). This British decree set out rules for colonial expansion and relations with Indigenous peoples in North America after the Seven Years' War.

• Key rules:

  • All land presumed Indigenous until ceded by treaty. "Ceded by treaty" means formally given up or surrendered through a negotiated agreement with the Crown.

  • Only the Crown (the British monarchy and its representatives in Canada) may purchase land from Indigenous peoples; settlers must buy via Crown. This was intended to prevent fraudulent land deals and protect Indigenous land rights.

• From $1764$–$1923$ \approx numbered treaties transfer title in exchange for: These treaties were agreements between the Crown and various Indigenous nations, often involving large tracts of land.

  • Reserves (\approx $2\%-$-$5\%$ of traditional territory). These were specific areas of land set aside for the exclusive use of First Nations.

  • Lump-sum/annual payments, hunting & fishing rights. These were part of the compensation and continued rights promised in exchange for land.

• Widespread Crown breaches: shrinking reserves, cancelled payments, curtailed harvesting rights. The Crown often failed to uphold its end of the treaty agreements, leading to ongoing grievances. For example, reserve lands were often reduced without consent, and promised payments were sometimes delayed or stopped.

• Vast regions (most of QC, all of NL, large parts of BC) remain untreatied \rightarrow modern land-claim negotiations. This means that in these areas, Indigenous land was never formally ceded by treaty, leading to unresolved land claims today.

Indian Act (1876)

• Consolidated earlier regulations; still in force (amended). This federal law is a primary piece of legislation governing many aspects of Indigenous (specifically First Nations) life in Canada. It has been highly criticized for its paternalistic and assimilationist nature.

• Key elements:

  • Created legal wards of the state; Superintendent-General of Indian Affairs wielded broad discretion. Being a "legal ward" meant Indigenous people were treated like minors, unable to make their own decisions, with the government (the Superintendent-General) having immense control over their lives, land, and resources.

  • Defined “Indian status” patriarchally: meaning status was primarily passed down through the male line; women/children would lose status upon marrying non-status men; obtaining a university degree or becoming a doctor/lawyer was considered “enfranchisement” (another term for loss of status). This was a deliberate effort to reduce the number of status Indians and assimilate them into Canadian society.

  • Banned voting in federal elections until $1960$, banned private property ownership on reserves, banned many traditional ceremonies (e.g., Potlatch, Powwow); implemented a pass system which restricted movement, pool-hall bans, etc. These restrictions were aimed at suppressing Indigenous culture and controlling their lives.

  • Imposed band-council electoral system, ignoring traditional governance structures. This replaced traditional leadership models with a system dictated by the Canadian government.

• Philosophies underpinning Act:

  1. Protection (paternalistic wards). The government claimed it was protecting Indigenous peoples, but this "protection" came with severe control and loss of autonomy.

  2. Civilisation (residential schools, outlawing cultures). The belief that Indigenous peoples needed to be "civilized" according to European norms, leading to policies like residential schools and the suppression of cultural practices.

  3. Assimilation (eventual absorption once “civilised”). The ultimate goal was to absorb Indigenous peoples into mainstream Canadian society, ending their distinct identities and legal status.

Residential Schools & TRC

• Children removed (late 1800s–1970s); operated mainly by churches with government funding. These were boarding schools where Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families and communities with the explicit goal of assimilation, often through abuse and cultural eradication.

• Truth & Reconciliation Commission (2008–15): documented abuse; federal apology & compensation settlement. The TRC investigated the history and legacy of residential schools, revealing widespread physical, emotional, and sexual abuse, and cultural destruction. Its report called for actions to heal and repair the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples.

Socio-Economic Impacts

• Voting rights federally only in $1960$. Previously, Indigenous peoples with "Indian status" were largely disenfranchised, preventing their political participation.

• Land conflicts (e.g. Oka Crisis $1990$: golf-course expansion on Mohawk land \rightarrow army deployment). These conflicts highlight ongoing disputes over land and resources that stem from historical dispossession and unresolved claims.

• Education: Indigenous high-school completion \approx $50\%$ vs. $70\%$ non-Indigenous. This disparity reflects systemic barriers, underfunding, and the lasting impact of residential schools.

• Poverty: First Nations children on-reserve $53\%$ in poverty, off-reserve $41\%$; nat’l average $18\%.$. This significant gap underscores the severe economic challenges faced by many Indigenous communities.

  • Lowest rates in QC due to 1970s hydro agreements. These agreements, like the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, provided significant economic benefits and a degree of self-determination, leading to better outcomes.

• Housing: $16.4\%$ of Indigenous dwellings need major repair vs. $6\%$ non-Indigenous. A clear indicator of inadequate living conditions.

• Drinking-water advisories persist. Many First Nations communities still lack access to safe, clean drinking water, a basic human right.\
  These socio-economic disparities are a direct legacy of colonial policies and systemic discrimination, impacting health, well-being, and self-determination.

White Paper (1969)

• Trudeau/C. Chrétien proposed abolishing status, reserves, federal responsibility \rightarrow backlash; Indigenous nationalism surges. This proposal aimed to eliminate the Indian Act, Indian status, and reserves, effectively assimilating Indigenous peoples by making them regular Canadian citizens. However, Indigenous leaders widely rejected it, seeing it as another attempt at assimilation and a betrayal of treaty rights, leading to a strong assertion of Indigenous rights and identity.

Constitutional Entrenchment (1982)

• s.25 shields treaty/Indigenous rights from Charter override. This section ensures that the rights of Indigenous peoples, including treaty rights, cannot be negatively affected by other provisions in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It provides a level of protection for these distinct rights.

• s.35 affirms “existing Aboriginal & treaty rights.” This section is crucial as it constitutionally recognized and affirmed the existing Indigenous and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada (First Nations, Inuit, and Métis), providing a legal basis for future claims and negotiations.

• Triggers modern self-government & land-claim negotiations (e.g., Nisga’a treaty, Nunavut 1999). The constitutional recognition provided a framework for Indigenous nations to negotiate greater control over their own affairs ("self-government") and resolve long-standing land claims.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996)

• Called for apology, self-government, Aboriginal Parliament, resource transfers. This extensive report, following years of research, made broad recommendations for fundamental changes in the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada.

Contemporary Themes

• Progress largely through courts (treaty, hunting, equality cases). Indigenous communities and individuals have frequently relied on the legal system to affirm and enforce their rights when political negotiations have stalled.

• Slow land-claim talks; federal/provincial reluctance. Negotiating modern treaties or land claim settlements continues to be a lengthy and often frustrating process due to government resistance.

• Nunavut creation; urbanisation; murdered & missing Indigenous women inquiry.

  • Nunavut (established in 1999) is a large territory in northern Canada, primarily governed by Inuit. It's an example of a successful modern land claim agreement and self-government structure.

  • The inquiry into murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls highlighted the systemic violence and discrimination they face.

• “Race-shifting” scandals (false claims of Indigeneity in academia, arts – e.g. Buffy Sainte-Marie). This refers to instances where individuals with no genuine Indigenous ancestry falsely claim to be Indigenous, often for personal or professional gain, undermining the rights and identities of actual Indigenous peoples.

• Intellectual turn from “reconciliation” \rightarrow “resurgence” (Glen Coulthard): This marks a shift in Indigenous political thought.

  • Reconciliation often refers to state-led efforts to mend relationships, which some critics argue focuses too much on apologies and minor reforms without fundamental power shifts.

  • Resurgence critiques state-led recognition and instead embraces direct action, anti-capitalism, gender equity, and building parallel Indigenous institutions outside of the settler-colonial framework. It's about Indigenous peoples reclaiming and revitalizing their own governance, laws, and cultures on their own terms.

Quebec Politics (6-Video Sequence)

Key Demographics & Terms

• 2021: $21\%$ of Canadians have French mother-tongue (down from $30\%$ in 1951). This decline highlights concerns about the vitality of the French language in Canada.

• $88\%$ of Francophones live in QC; QC itself $78\%$ Francophone. Quebec is the only province where French is the majority language.

• Nation(alism) = source of loyalty; Quebec nationalism’s subject shifted:

  • Pre-1960: French-Canadian nation across Canada. Before the Quiet Revolution, French-Canadian identity was tied to language and Catholicism, extending to Francophone communities outside Quebec.

  • Post-1960: Quebec territorial nation. After $1960$, nationalism became more focused on Quebec as a distinct territory and political entity, with a unique culture and aspirations for greater autonomy or sovereignty.

Pre-Quiet-Revolution (to 1960)

New France \rightarrow British Conquest

• Sparse colony (\approx $<br>60{,}000$
  French vs. $<br>1.5\,\text{million}$
  British settlers). New France was a relatively small French colony in North America.

• 1760 Battle of Plains of Abraham \rightarrow British rule; Quebec Act 1774 restores French law, Catholic rights. After the British defeated the French, the Quebec Act was a pragmatic move to ensure the loyalty of the French-speaking population by allowing them to maintain their civil law and religious freedoms, which differed significantly from British common law and the Protestant faith.

Rebellions 1837-38 (Patriotes)

• Demand responsible government; defeated; leaders executed/exiled. "Responsible government" meant that the executive branch (the government) would be accountable to the elected legislative assembly, not just to the British Crown. The Patriotes were French-Canadian nationalists who sought more democratic control over their affairs.

• Durham Report (1839): “two warring nations… French a people without history”; recommends Union of Canadas to assimilate Francophones. Lord Durham, sent by Britain to investigate the rebellions, saw the French and English as fundamentally incompatible. He recommended uniting Upper and Lower Canada (mostly English and French respectively) into a single province to assimilate the French-speaking population into the English majority.

Ideology of “La Survivance”

• Catholic Church + ruralism + high fertility (“revenge of the cradle”) to resist anglicisation/materialism. "La Survivance" (The Survival) was an ideology in Quebec that emphasized the preservation of French-Canadian culture through adherence to the Catholic Church, living in rural areas (seen as more pure and traditional), and having large families to ensure demographic strength against the English-speaking majority. It was a strategy to maintain their identity in a predominantly English Canada.

• French-Canadian nationalism: Catholic, pan-Canadian, anti-modern, led by clergy & figures like Abbé Groulx. This form of nationalism was rooted in religion, applied to all French speakers across Canada, and resisted modern industrial changes thought to threaten traditional values.

Duplessis Era (1944-59) – “La Grande Noirceur”

• Union Nationale alliance with Church; anti-communist, laissez-faire toward US capital; clergy control schools/hospitals. Maurice Duplessis's conservative government ruled Quebec for much of this period. "La Grande Noirceur" (The Great Darkness) is a pejorative term for this era, used by later generations to describe it as a period of social and economic stagnation, dominated by the conservative influence of the Catholic Church and government resistance to social change.

• Opposition: Refus Global manifesto (1948), Asbestos strike. These were early signs of nascent opposition to the Duplessis regime's traditionalism and power structures.

• Revisionist historians: QC not uniquely “backward” vs. contemporaneous McCarthyism, Maritime corruption; but Church power was unique. Some historians argue that Quebec wasn't as uniquely backward as "La Grande Noirceur" suggests, but concede that the Church's extensive influence in public life was indeed exceptional compared to other North American societies.

Quiet Revolution (1960-1966)

• Jean Lesage Liberals: slogan “C’est le temps que ça change!” (It's time for things to change!). This period marked a rapid and profound social and political transformation in Quebec.

• State secularisation: gov’t assumes education, health, social services. The government took over institutions previously controlled by the Catholic Church (e.g., schools, hospitals), leading to a more secular and modern society.

• Nationalise hydro power \rightarrow Hydro-Québec (engineered by René Lévesque). This was a symbolic and practical act of state control over a key resource, seen as a way for Quebec to take charge of its own economic development.

• Rise of welfare state, technocratic bureaucracy, new Francophone middle class. Government expansion led to a significant increase in public services and a new class of educated, French-speaking professionals managing them.

• Massive decline in church attendance; secular values spread. The shift from church to state control led to a rapid secularization of Quebec society.

• Emergence of modern Quebec nationalism & sovereignty movement. With a stronger provincial government and a secular identity, the idea of Quebec as a distinct nation worthy of more autonomy or even independence gained traction.

Economic Grievances Driving Nationalism

• 1961 male income (QC):

  • Bilingual anglophone \approx $
    6000\$;

  • Unilingual anglophone \approx $
    5000\
    (> bilingual francophone \approx $
    4300\$<br>).</p></li><li><p>Unilingual francophone \approx$$
    3000\$<br>(\approx$$
    \tfrac12$<br>unilingual anglophone).</p></li></ul></li><li><p>Management strata overwhelmingly anglophone; Sun Life example (0 francophone VPs).</p></li><li><p>Workplace language often English even in$80\% francophone society.
    These income disparities and the dominance of English speakers in higher-paying jobs and management, even within a French-speaking majority province, fueled a sense of injustice and contributed to the rise of Quebec nationalism, emphasizing the need for Francophone control over Quebec's economy.

  Political Radicalism & FLQ

  • 1960s FLQ bombs/kidnappings \rightarrow October Crisis 1970; War Measures Act; death of Minister Pierre Laporte. The FLQ (Front de libération du Québec) was a small, radical separatist group that used violence to achieve its goals, leading to a severe government response and a national crisis.

  Language Legislation – Bill 101 (Charte de la langue française, 1977)

  1. Education: children of parents educated in English anywhere in Canada may attend English public schools; others must attend French if publicly funded. This rule was designed to ensure that most immigrants and Quebec-born children attended French schools, strengthening the French language.

  2. Workplace: firms \ge 50 employees must operate primarily in French. This was aimed at making French the language of business and promoting francophone access to management positions.

  3. Commercial signs: original ban on other languages \rightarrow Supreme Court ruled must allow but French may be predominant. While initially aiming for French-only signs, the Supreme Court required other languages to be permitted, though French must be notably larger or more prominent.

  • Effects: francophone economic catch-up, francophone–immigrant contact, French linguistic landscape; “great Canadian law” per Stéphane Dion (forestalled independence). Bill 101 significantly strengthened the position of the French language in Quebec, improving economic opportunities for francophones and shaping the province's cultural identity. Its proponents argue it helped secure the future of French in Quebec, thereby reducing the urgency for separation.

  Parti Québécois & Referenda

  • PQ formed via mergers (RN, RIN, MSA); wins 1976 election. The Parti Québécois is a sovereignist political party committed to making Quebec an independent country.

  1980 Referendum – “Sovereignty-Association”

  • Question sought mandate to negotiate; federal PM P.E. Trudeau promises renewal. The PQ government asked Quebecers for a mandate (permission) to negotiate a new relationship with Canada, one that involved political sovereignty while maintaining an economic association. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, then Prime Minister, promised constitutional reform if Quebec voted 'No'.

  • Result: 60\%$“No”,$40\%$“Yes”. Quebecers voted against the proposal for sovereignty-association.</p></li></ul><p>1982 Patriation without QC</p><ul><li><p>Constitutional deal (“night of the long knives”) fuels resentment; set stage for Meech Lake Accord (1990 failure). The Canadian Constitution was patriated (brought home from Britain) in 1982, but Quebec (under a PQ government) did not sign the agreement, feeling it was excluded from the final negotiations. The "night of the long knives" refers to the alleged secret meeting where all provinces but Quebec agreed, leading to deep resentment in Quebec and the feeling of being betrayed.</p></li></ul><p>1995 Referendum</p><ul><li><p>Context: NAFTA reduces economic fear; federal cuts hurt welfare state; charismatic Bloc leader Lucien Bouchard. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) lessened concerns about the economic viability of an independent Quebec. Federal cuts to social programs also angered many Quebecers, while Lucien Bouchard, leader of the federal Bloc Québécois, provided strong pro-sovereignty leadership.</p></li><li><p>Result:$49.4\%$Yes vs.$50.6\%$No (margin \approx$$
    25{,}000$<br>votes). This referendum on sovereignty was extremely close, almost leading to Quebec's separation from Canada.</p></li><li><p>Post-1995: sovereignty support oscillates \sim$30{-}$$40\%; QC share of population falling raises clout concerns. Support for sovereignty has generally declined since 1995, and Quebec's shrinking share of Canada's total population further complicates the viability of a sovereignty project.

  Distinct Society Traits

  • Secularism: world-leading common-law unions, low religiosity. Quebec is notably more secular (non-religious) than the rest of Canada, evidenced by high rates of common-law partnerships and low church attendance.

  • Socially progressive; supports larger welfare state, higher taxes. Quebecers tend to favor more government intervention in social services and a stronger welfare state, often with higher taxes to support these.

  • Same desire for immigration levels as ROC but higher cultural-security concerns. While Quebec generally supports similar levels of immigration as the Rest of Canada (ROC), there is a stronger emphasis on ensuring that immigrants integrate into Quebec's French-speaking culture, driven by concerns about linguistic and cultural survival.

  Religious Accommodation & Laïcité Debates (2000s–Present)

  “Reasonable Accommodation” Crisis (mid-2000s)

  • Flashpoints: These were specific incidents that sparked public debate.

    • Multani case (kirpan in school) \rightarrow Supreme Court upholds religious freedom. The court ruled that a Sikh student could wear a kirpan (a ceremonial dagger) to school as a religious symbol, provided it was safely secured.

    • YMCA frosted windows for neighbouring Hasidic boys. A YMCA branch frosted its windows to accommodate the modesty concerns of a nearby Hasidic Jewish school, leading to a public outcry.

  • Media “tsunami” of stories amplifies anxiety. These incidents, often sensationalized by the media, created a perceived "crisis" around how far society should go to accommodate religious practices, particularly concerning minority religions.\
    "Reasonable accommodation" refers to the legal and social obligation to adjust rules or practices to allow individuals to practice their religion, unless doing so would cause undue hardship.

  Bouchard–Taylor Commission (2007-08)

  • Recommends:

    • Adopt interculturalism (pluralism + centrality of French). This model seeks to integrate immigrants while emphasizing the importance of French language and Quebec's distinct culture, contrasting with Canada's multiculturalism.

    • Ban religious symbols only for coercive state agents: judges, crown prosecutors, police, prison guards, National Assembly Speaker. The commission recommended limits only for those symbols worn by state officials whose roles involve exercising authority, to maintain the neutrality of the state.

    • Remove National Assembly crucifix. This was recommended to symbolize the secular nature of the state by removing a prominent religious symbol from a state institution.

  Charter of Quebec Values (PQ, 2013-14)

  • Proposed total ban for all public-sector workers (teachers, nurses, etc.); failed after PQ lost 2014 election. This controversial proposal aimed to prohibit visible religious symbols for a much broader range of public sector employees, reflecting a more expansive view of state secularism.

  Bill 21 (CAQ, 2019) – “Laïcité of the State”

  • Enacted; key points:

    • Applies to persons in authority: same list as Bouchard–Taylor plus public-school teachers. This law goes beyond the Bouchard-Taylor recommendations by including teachers in the ban on religious symbols.

    • Grandfather clause: existing employees keep symbols if unchanged position. This means individuals already employed in affected positions and wearing religious symbols are exempt from the ban as long as they stay in the same job.

    • National Assembly crucifix removed simultaneously. This fulfilled a recommendation from the Bouchard-Taylor Commission.

  • Invokes s.33 Notwithstanding Clause to protect from Charter challenges. The "Notwithstanding Clause" (Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) allows federal or provincial governments to temporarily override certain Charter rights (like freedom of religion) for a period of up to five years, effectively shielding a law from court challenges based on those rights. This was used to enact Bill 21 despite potential conflicts with the Charter.\
    Laïcité refers to a concept of state secularism originating in France, where the state maintains strict neutrality towards religion, separating it from public institutions and ensuring freedom of conscience for all, but often interpreted as limiting the prominent display of religious symbols in public spaces.

  Public-Opinion Research (“A Tale of Two Liberalisms” – Bilodeau, White, Anderson, A. Béland)

  • 2014 Canada-wide survey: QC support for bans \approx 74\% (police) & 59\%$(teachers) vs.$45\%$/$29\%$ROC. This shows significantly higher support for religious symbol bans in Quebec compared to the Rest of Canada (ROC).</p></li><li><p>Tested explanations:</p><ol><li><p>Xenophobia – cannot fully account for gap. While some xenophobia may exist, it doesn't fully explain the widespread support.</p></li><li><p>Lower religiosity – insufficient. While Quebec is more secular, this alone doesn't explain why secularism would lead to bans.</p></li><li><p>Cultural insecurity – still inadequate. Concerns about cultural survival may play a role, but don't fully explain the specific nature of the support.</p></li></ol></li><li><p>Key driver: Socially liberal respondents in QC more likely to support bans, opposite of ROC. This is a counter-intuitive finding, as social liberals usually value individual freedom and diversity.</p></li><li><p>Interpreted as clash of two liberal traditions:</p><ul><li><p>Multicultural/Reformation Liberalism (individual freedom from state coercion) – dominant in ROC. This tradition emphasizes individual rights and freedoms, including religious freedom, and views the state's role as protecting individuals from religious interference.</p></li><li><p>French/Enlightenment Liberalism (state frees individuals from oppressive institutions incl. religion) – influential in QC. This tradition sees the state as a positive force that can liberate individuals from the perceived oppressive influence of institutions, including organized religion. Therefore, restrictions on religious symbols in public institutions are seen as promoting individual freedom and equality, not limiting it.</p></li></ul></li><li><p>Thus progressive secularism + conservative nativism form “strange bedfellows” coalition for laïcité. This means that two groups with otherwise different political ideologies (socially liberal secularists and culturally conservative nationalists) find common ground in supporting policies of state laïcité in Quebec.</p></li></ul><p>Quick Reference Timeline</p><ul><li><p>$1763$Royal Proclamation</p></li><li><p>$1876$Indian Act</p></li><li><p>$1944{-}$$59$<br>Duplessis era in QC</p></li><li><p>$1960$Lesage elected \rightarrow Quiet Revolution begins</p></li><li><p>$1969$Federal White Paper (rejected)</p></li><li><p>$1976$PQ elected;$1977$Bill 101</p></li><li><p>$1980$First QC referendum</p></li><li><p>$1982$Constitution patriated (s.25, s.35)</p></li><li><p>$1990$Oka Crisis; Meech Lake fails</p></li><li><p>$1995$Second QC referendum</p></li><li><p>$1996$Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples report</p></li><li><p>$2007$Bouchard–Taylor Commission</p></li><li><p>$2019$$ QC Bill 21 (State Laïcité)