Open Collections

Despatie, Sarah

University of British Columbia

In 2018, the government of the province of Québec put forward and passed Bill 21, An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State, which proposed, among other measures, to ban public servants from wearing religious symbols at work. While ostensibly seeking to further secularism in the province, an analysis of the legislative debates makes it clear that the main question at issue was one of nationalism rather than secularism. Further, parties’ voting patterns were not split according to the more classic Québec party divisions of left-right economic positioning and stance on separatism. This thesis puts forward an analysis of the legislative debates surrounding Bill 21, using qualitative coding and textual analysis to determine party priorities in presenting opposition or support for the bill to the public in a highly mediatized debate. While each party puts forward a distinct narrative of what it means to belong in the Québec nation in these debates, party positioning on Bill 21 can be explained by speakers’ positioning on a plural-monist axis related to questions of nationalism, intersecting with normative ideals of how restrictive or inclusive the idea of the nation should be. This finding has interesting implications for the study of integration measures in other subnational states—notably, that understandings of nationhood, and who should be included in it, may prove more influential in shaping integration policy than other traditional party markers, such as economic left-right positioning or positioning on questions of separatism.

Text

2022-01-05

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/80532

Political Science

University of British Columbia

UBCV

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/