We had to do something. To protect academic freedom. To put an end to the climate of inquisition that sometimes rages on campuses. To reiterate loud and clear that the university is a place of debate and confrontation of ideas, not a “safe space”. We do not cancel conferences, and even less teachers, on the pretext that their teachings displease us or make us uncomfortable.
Posted at 7:00 a.m.
After the Verushka Lieutenant-Duval affair, which had suffered the wrath of the University of Ottawa for having pronounced the “word beginning with an N” in a teaching context, more than 500 Quebec professors had denounced this attack to the academic freedom. And this was not an isolated case. In the wake of this lamentable affair, teachers had admitted to self-censorship, a question of avoiding trouble.
Yes, something had to be done. The government therefore set up an independent Scientific and Technical Commission, chaired by former Minister Alexandre Cloutier.
His report was well received – a feat, as there were so many pitfalls. “We still managed to land a Boeing on an iceberg,” recalls Alexandre Cloutier in an interview. Correctly, smoothly, in harmony and in a relatively consensual way. Every word of the report had been weighed. »
The report concluded… that something had to be done.
So, in early April, the Minister of Higher Education, Danielle McCann, tabled Bill 32, largely inspired by the recommendations of the report. The teachers and lecturers applauded. Opposition parties were supportive. It seemed in the pocket.
A month later, everyone – rectors, professors, lecturers and students – seems to find this bill appalling. As if, in the end, this great idea wasn’t so great anymore. Certain elements of the bill would even risk undermining the academic freedom it aims to protect!
What happened ?
Minister McCann has deviated slightly from the report’s very carefully drafted recommendations, believes Alexandre Cloutier. Oh, barely. But enough to displease the players in academia. Enough to worry about the Boeing crashing.
The maneuver is tricky. For example, the bill requires institutions to establish a policy on academic freedom. Very good. But section 6 gives the minister the power to order universities to add “anything[elle] noted “.
For many, this little bit of phrase would jeopardize a sacred principle of academic freedom: the autonomy of universities from the state.
In a brief presented to a parliamentary committee, the University of Montreal warns that article 6 would provide a “legal basis for massive and unprecedented intrusions into the autonomous decision-making sphere of universities”. The discretion conferred on the Minister “would border on arbitrariness”, allowing her to enforce a particular, even personal, conception of academic freedom.
The students agree. The teachers too. In its current form, the bill gives “exceptional and completely new” powers to the minister, worries the Quebec Federation of University Professors (FQPPU).
These worries can be brushed aside. Retort that the Minister’s intentions are pure and that she would never stick her nose in the affairs of universities if she was not obliged to do so.
But Danielle McCann will leave politics in the fall. And the CAQ will not be in power forever.
What if, in a world not so far away, a less well-meaning government came to power? What if this government got it into its head to impose its values on the universities?
Pure fiction ? Not that much. Engaged in a crusade against wokism, the governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, has just signed the Individual Liberty Actbetter known as the “Stop Woke Act”.
Under this law, which will come into force on 1er July, public universities that deviate from principles drafted by Republican lawmakers risk being sued or losing public funding.
It will be forbidden, for example, to place the weight of historical injustices on a group based on the color of its skin. Inevitably, the law will push teachers who teach the history of slavery to self-censor. Their classrooms will become safe spaces for white students, or else their university stands to lose millions…
Quebec is obviously a thousand miles from this catastrophic scenario. Nevertheless: Article 6 could open the door to excesses. It needs to be closed now. Right the Boeing. Amend the bill.
Alexandre Cloutier also thinks that Mr.me McCann must “soften” Article 6 to preserve university autonomy. It must also broaden the definition of academic freedom – the current form of which does not allow professors to criticize their university. “I think we can easily find a consensus by going back to the proposals in our report. »
On Tuesday, the minister showed herself open to the idea of “readjusting” the bill. “I receive it very positively,” she assured. “If it is necessary to improve this bill, she had declared earlier in the day, we will certainly do it, but on the principle, on the protection of academic freedom and the end of self-censorship, we we are categorical: there will be no compromise. »
Alexandre Cloutier remains “deeply convinced of the need for a law” to protect academic freedom. Convinced that, yes, something must be done.
But you have to do it well.