(Quebec) Should we trumpet our pride in having banned any demonstration related to COVID-19 within 50 meters of thousands of establishments in Quebec? MP Andrés Fontecilla, from Québec solidaire, does not believe it.
“From there to saying that it is a glorious day for Quebec democracy because we are restricting a fundamental right, I will not go that far,” he said in an interview with The Canadian Press on Friday.
He returned to the day Thursday, described as “grandiose” by the Minister of Public Security, Geneviève Guilbault, at the time of rushing and unanimously passing his Bill 105.
The new law temporarily removes anti-vaccine protesters from daycares, schools, CEGEPs and all health and social services establishments, including screening and vaccination clinics.
It also allows the police to impose hefty fines on anyone who organizes, incites to organize or participates in an anti-sanitary measures demonstration within a perimeter of 50 meters from these places.
“There was a security and punitive escalation, especially on the part of the Liberal Party, which even called for putting people in prison, to prosecute people by all means on social networks”, deplores Mr. Fontecilla.
“Yes, protect our children, the staff […] or vulnerable people, this is something that must be done, […] but there is a sort of triumphalism manifesting itself.
“It was necessary to be more sober in the reactions, and not to express an absolute joy, estimates it. Hearing them it sounds like it was a fantastic day. In any case, that was not my feeling. ”
Internal discussions at QS
Mr Fontecilla admits it bluntly: Bill 105 sparked heated discussions within his own party, as soon as Prime Minister François Legault announced his intention to legislate.
This is because the new law is casting a wide net; thus, disgruntled parents who would like to demonstrate against the poor air quality in schools could do so only more than 50 meters from a targeted establishment.
Air quality is the subject of a Public Health recommendation which is linked to the pandemic, the government explained on Thursday.
Québec solidaire would have liked the law to regulate only demonstrations aimed at dissuading a person from getting vaccinated against COVID-19 or from complying with health measures.
“Did we act too quickly? asks Mr. Fontecilla. It’s going to be history to say so. I think that we could have discussed at greater length certain elements of this law that are open to interpretation. ”
He recognizes, however, that there was “urgent need to act” to prevent children, in particular, from being intimidated by conspirators at lunchtime.
In addition, Andrés Fontecilla says he is “angry” that the law has included CEGEPs, places where minors and adults come together, but that now we “infantilize” in a “paternalistic” way.
“For us, this is unacceptable,” he said. It concerns young people […] who are perfectly capable of being exposed to political debate and making informed decisions.
“We had fairly frank discussions between all the deputies (of the caucus) and the party authorities,” he admits.
“No one disagreed with the principle of protecting students and staff. […] There has been a lot of discussion about the best ways to achieve it.
“Discussions, there have been. […] I believe that […] our members will understand the constraints in which we found ourselves and will consider that we made the right decision, ”he added.
“Authoritarian” measures
The member for Laurier-Dorion wonders, however, if the new law does not risk fueling the anger and “overreactions” of a section of the population “ejected completely outside the political debate”.
“It is up to the government to establish a climate of social dialogue, and not only to take refuge under authoritarian and coercive measures in order to control these excesses”, he pleads.
All the parties represented in the National Assembly voted for Bill 105. Independent MP Claire Samson, who joined the Conservative Party of Quebec, abstained from voting.