In his text Ideas “The succession of the nation” published last June 11 in this newspaper, Professor Louis Balthazar eloquently sets out the necessary contribution of immigration to Quebec. “These populations reinforce our demographic weight. They are our lifeline, the succession of the nation,” he says.
This succession does not only count when it comes to preserving our demographic weight. It also contributes to the vitality of our economy and to the richness and vigor of our cultural and artistic scene, often beyond our borders.
Even more, immigrants have proven to be indispensable in maintaining many of our essential services. Indeed, how can we not notice the presence of these in our health establishments (hospitals, CHSLDs, intermediate resources, CLSCs), in CPEs and daycare services, food services and home delivery?
Honestly, I don’t know how we could have made it through the pandemic without this contribution. Are we willing to recognize it as a nation? I seriously wonder.
Mr. Balthazar raises serious questions: “Are Quebecers sufficiently disposed to promote the civic friendship essential to the integration of newcomers? Do they feel welcome, respected, encouraged to join us? Are new Quebecers considered full citizens, regardless of their origin, their religion or the color of their skin? Does our government represent the minorities as well as the majority? »
Official discourse often takes pleasure in presenting Quebec society as welcoming towards foreigners. If we only look at the figures, we will conclude that Quebec is doing its part. Does that make us a truly hospitable people?
Inhospitality can manifest itself in different ways: restrictive policies on the number of admissions and laws that do not promote the full equality of minorities with the majority, openness to otherness and respect for differences, the ability to integration of newcomers. It is quite the opposite of the duty of hospitality, which is an instinctive moral obligation to help the stranger in need, to meet the Other without for all that renouncing the legitimate construction of “home”. self “. This is the paradox of true hospitality.
The balance between these two poles remains a perpetual challenge, especially because the Quebec nation must take the necessary measures to ensure the survival of its culture and its language. Interculturality remains the best vehicle for integration precisely because it takes into account the paradox of hospitality.
When our laws and policies treat certain citizens from abroad differently because of the color of their skin or their religion, or require them to be integrated almost instantaneously into the culture of the majority, hospitality becomes inhospitable.
The recent passage of French Language Bill 96 requires immigrants to obtain government services in French after six months. In my opinion, this is not only a serious lack of realism, but also a lack of respect for the people we welcome.
Interculturality should be the complete opposite of a withdrawal into identity that is sometimes observed when one candidly refers to the wishes of the majority. It is built dynamically through the dialogue of cultures and gives birth to an open, new society, rich in its past, but without being its prisoner, turned towards the future. Immigration is not a problem, but a wealth. Are we ready to run the risk of this mutation?