Bouchard-Taylor Commission citizen’s Forums:

Absence of a notable divide between Montréal and the rest of Québec

Montreal, December 19, 2007 – The Consultation Commission on Accommodation Practices Related to Cultural Differences (CCPARDC) today made public a statistical analysis of interventions at the 22 citizens’ forums held during its round of public consultations.

By creating an original formula that emphasized free expression by participants, the CCPARDC conducted what has proved to be a profoundly democratic exercise, all things considered. An analysis of interventions during the 22 forums reveals that a strong majority (85%) were moderate or pluralistic in nature. Potentially offensive remarks that reflected ignorance, stereotypes or prejudices accounted for 12% of interventions, while openly racist or xenophobic remarks were rare in all regions of Québec (1.8%).¹

No notable discrepancy was noted between the Montréal area and the rest of Québec. Such being the case, the proportion of positive interventions is higher in the five peripheral regions that the Commission visited (Abitibi, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, Côte-Nord, Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie) than in the Montréal area (Montréal Island, Longueuil and Laval), i.e. 90% and 84%, respectively. The forum held on October 30 in Québec City stands out in that no negative interventions were noted.

The citizens’ forums posed a daunting challenge whose risks were readily apparent. They also gave rise to certain outbursts, which was undoubtedly to be expected. The co-chairs are keenly sensitive to the reactions of individuals who were offended by certain intolerant remarks made during the forums. Considerable moderation and sincerity were the hallmarks of this unique, unprecedented experience.

“Among the opinions expressed, we note, above all, massive support for immigrants and the very widespread desire to establish between all Quebecers a sound relationship based on understanding and collaboration,” noted Commission Co-Chair Charles Taylor. “Thank you, once again, to everyone who participated in this enlightening experience in Québec-style democracy.”

The co-chairs wish to express their deep gratitude to all Quebecers who submitted to them their reflections through briefs, testimony at public hearings or participation in the 22 regional citizens’ forums, the three province-wide forums, or through the Commission’s Website.

“The tour of the regions produced a wealth of information and aroused the gamut of emotions,” added Co-Chair Gérard Bouchard. “It revealed a wide range of viewpoints and convictions, concerns and aspirations. It also enabled numerous individuals to speak and to take part in what can be deemed a key democratic debate, of which each participant can be proud.”

Statistics on the consultations

The period for submitting briefs has ended and other statistical compilations are under way. Complete data on the briefs submitted or presented, the testimony heard and visits to the Commission Website will be announced in early 2008. The province-wide forum to be held in Montréal next February, organized in collaboration with the Institut du Nouveau Monde (INM), will be the Commission’s final public consultation. It is still possible to register for the forum by visiting the INM Website (www.inm.qc.ca).

The Commission

The CCAPRDC, co-chaired by sociologist and historian Gérard Bouchard and philosopher Charles Taylor, has been asked to take stock of accommodation practices and analyse all facets of the question by conducting a province-wide consultation. The Commission will submit a report and make recommendations to the Québec Premier on March 31, 2008 (www.accommodements.qc.ca).

--------

Study methodology

The statistical study of data was conducted by a team of three academics mandated by the Commission, under the responsibility of Professor Rachad Antonius, a sociologist at the Université du Québec à Montréal. The methodological details of the analysis and the attendant tables are presented in full in the report. The summaries were intended primarily to offer an overview of the nature of the interveners’ comments from the standpoint of openness to the other. The interventions were divided into the following categories:
I. openly xenophobic, racist, unacceptable remarks;
II. tactless, rash, hurtful, ignorant, stereotypical or prejudiced remarks;
III. balanced, subtle, thoughtful, critical, analytical remarks that focused on rules and principles;
IV. pluralistic remarks in defence of immigrants and the cultural communities, and praise for civic virtues such as receptiveness, understanding, and so on;
V. varied, respectful reflections that had no direct bearing on the general theme of the management of differences. These comments have been included in the “Other” category.

--------

¹  These percentages are drawn from the report entitled Analyse préliminaire des interventions faites lors des forums de la CCPARDC. The analytical report prepared by three experts at the Commission’s request is available on the Commission’s Website (Internet www.accommodements.qc.ca).

- 30 -

Analyse préliminaire des interventions faites lors des forums de la CCPARDC (In French, PDF, 12 pages, 174 Kb)