Quebec City’s decision to appeal a judgment that finally gave asylum seekers back the right to subsidized daycare, after a four-year ban, reflects a migration policy that is insensitive to the vulnerability of citizens awaiting refugee status. . Organizations defending the rights of these applicants, who have a work permit but cannot use it for lack of means, are right to be exasperated.
This issue, both complex and disarmingly simple, has been making headlines for four years. In April 2018, the Liberal government of Philippe Couillard decided without warning to reinterpret section 3 of the Regulation respecting the free contribution of the Educational Childcare Services Act. While this article previously gave access to daycare centers at $8.70 a day to any holder of a “work permit and [qui] stays in Quebec mainly to work”, a new reading of this article excluded asylum seekers, who were deemed to be present in Quebec not “mainly” to work. Overnight, this category of migrants found themselves deprived of access to subsidized childcare services, despite the fact that they held a work permit.
When taking power in 2018, the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) did not see fit to reverse the decision of the previous government, which had raised the ire of all groups defending the rights of refugees and asylum seekers. asylum. Access to subsidized daycare is of paramount importance in the lives of people who have recently arrived in Quebec and who want to integrate, work and learn French. For children, this access is crucial. Even the economic arguments do not hold water to justify this obscure stubbornness of Quebec in excluding this group of citizens from access to daycare, because, due to a lack of financial means, many mothers have to give up working, even if they hold a work permit. In the midst of a labor shortage, this is utter nonsense.
The media has reported many implausible stories of single mothers being forced to rely on welfare and turning down many job offers because the price of private child care — about $50 a day, compared to $8 $.70 in daycare centers supported by Quebec — was literally equivalent to the amount of their monthly rent. While labor shortages in a number of crucial sectors are in the process of creating a living Quebec like Gruyère, with gaping holes in its supply of essential services, we would be turning our backs on a group of workers ready to integrate into Quebec society through work?
Quebec uses the strong influx of migrants, the waiting lists for subsidized daycare centers and the unreasonable waiting times imposed by the federal government to justify its refusal to correctly re-read section 3 of the Regulation; but the truth is that it itself adds pitfalls to the already tortuous road of migrant integration. Furthermore, and this is a real disgrace for a government whose last election campaign slogan on immigration was “take less, but take care of it”, the CAQ’s interpretation targets a vulnerable group . This is in total contradiction with all humanitarian policies supporting asylum seekers.
It was therefore necessary to turn to the courts to find out if Quebec had erred in deciding to propose a new reading of section 3. At the end of last May, Judge Marc St-Pierre, of the Superior Court, decreed that it had. ” [Le Tribunal] declares that article 3 of the Regulation on the reduced contribution was adopted without legislative authorization and is therefore ultra vires and zero,” he concluded, which caused immense relief on the part of the organizations that had been agitating for four years for this turnaround. The victory was short-lived, because on July 7, Quebec decided to appeal the decision. It’s heartbreaking.
Approaching a 3e Immigration Summit, which should normally be held next November, it would be interesting to validate the consistency of all immigration policies and practices on the ground, because the whole of the work reveals a number of failures and implausibilities that undermine Quebec’s economic objectives and social policies. Much has been made of immigration thresholds, reducing the file to a matter of figures, while the heart of the work lies in the integration – failed – of those who are there.
The tug-of-war that is being played out between Ottawa and Quebec around this crucial file does not in any way give Quebec some air, it must be remembered. Ottawa is mired in red tape and shameful delays, from which Quebec suffers. But it must honor its promises to the people to whom it opens its doors and allow them to access the labor market in the fastest and most dignified way.