The immigrant punching bag | The Press

I have nothing against the fact that we discuss immigration during the election campaign. But it’s all in the way…

Is it possible to talk about it in a responsible and respectful way? Without making the immigrant a punch bag electoral? Without being constantly presented as a gravedigger of the nation with barbaric values? Without it feeling like we’re talking about a load of socks here rather than the lives of thousands of people?

After François Legault’s apologies that followed his heartbreaking amalgamation of immigration, extremism and violence last week, one would have hoped that the Prime Minister would come back to this thorny subject with more height. Following his hurtful statement for Quebecers of immigrant origin, the chief caquiste could have been saved by the queen and her media eclipse. He could have made sure to turn his tongue seven or maybe even eight times before talking about immigration again.

The following things show us, alas! that it is nothing. No sooner had he said sorry “if [ses] remarks were confusing”, hardly had he claimed to want to “bring together”, that Mr. Legault chose to assimilate too many non-French-speaking immigration to a threat to “national cohesion”.

Pulling out your boxing gloves to hit the same immigrant from another angle seems a somewhat odd way to put things together. Unless the objective is to bring together voters who fear immigration above all.

During the most recent episode of the series “Immigrant punch bag “, the CAQ leader argued that the national cohesion that Quebecers have shown by sticking together during the pandemic comes from the fact that they constitute a “tightly woven” nation that defends French. To protect this tightly knit Quebec, it would therefore be necessary to limit non-French-speaking immigration, he said, forgetting in passing the contribution of all Quebec immigrant allophones who, at the worst of the health crisis, held out at arm’s length. a collapsing healthcare system.

There was already in the previous episode of Mr. Legault’s apology an admission even more troubling than his initial statement. Getting entangled in his explanations, the CAQ leader said, the day after his unfortunate statement, that his mistake was to name Quebec values, answering questions from journalists.

“We must not name which values ​​because it could create an amalgam”, he said, specifying that “it is a delicate subject” which he should “avoid”.

In short, the mistake, according to Mr. Legault, is not so much to have made a statement based on falsehoods, which stirs up prejudice and distrust with regard to immigration, but to have said everything high what is not said. Not because it’s false… But because it would be “tricky”.

However, there is absolutely nothing difficult in naming the values ​​that underpin Quebec society. They are also listed in black and white in an official declaration that all newcomers must sign and which states:

– in Quebec, women and men are equal;

– Québec is a free and democratic society;

– Quebec is a secular society;

– Quebec is a French-speaking society;

– Québec is a society based on the rule of law;

– Québec is a society where the exercise of human rights and freedoms must respect those of others and the general well-being;

– Québec is a pluralistic society.

There is absolutely nothing delicate there, I said. Unless you assume from the outset that the immigrant is, by default, this threatening “Other”, likely to be opposed to such principles.

This is what the Conservative Party of Quebec tells us when it promises to select immigrants based on their “civilizational compatibility”, implying that too many candidates are not civilized enough for Quebec.

By associating immigration, extremism and violence, the populist statement for which Mr. Legault apologized unfortunately went in the same direction. Far from dispelling the confusion about his true intentions, his apology only fueled it.

Far from “bringing together” all Quebecers, as he says he wants to do, the CAQ leader contributes – both by what he says and by what he does not say, but implies – to make the immigrant a particularly convenient scarecrow during an election period.

By agitating it again and again, the CAQ is holding a double discourse. On the one hand, they claim to want to limit permanent non-francophone immigration to fight against the decline of French, to properly francize and integrate newcomers and to maintain the social cohesion of a “tightly woven” Quebec. On the other hand, without bragging about it, the CAQ government did not hesitate to increase this decline itself by bringing in a record number of temporary, easily exploitable workers during its mandate. All that while adapting rather well to the fact that these workers, even if they are mostly non-francophones who can become permanent residents, do not have access to francization.

But hey, it’s easier to hit the immigrant punch bag than to be consistent.