Critics question effectiveness and worry about the silencing of free speech
The House of Commons passed a non-binding motion on March 23 that condemns religious discrimination with an emphasis on Islamophobia.
The recent attack on a Québec City mosque that left six people dead gave the motion symbolic significance and urgency.
Following months of protests and counter-protests, which included violent clashes, the M-103 motion passed with 201 votes for and 91 votes against according to an article published by CBC. A majority of Conservatives voted against the motion, while leadership candidates Michael Chong and Simcoe North MP Bruce Stanton voted in favour. All NDP and Liberal MPs supported the motion.Discourse surrounding the vote questioned whether the private member’s motion would limit free speech or grant Islam special treatment within Canadian law.
“Then too, there is the rhetorical or forensic deployment of the term. A person who criticizes Islam, or who reasonably makes a connection between current terrorism and certain groups within Islam will, in some circles, very quickly be labelled Islamophobic,” wrote Rex Murphy, a conservative columnist for The National Post.
Critics also wonder if the motion will have any actual significance on the operations of Canadian law, questioning if the motion is simply a symbolic gesture by the liberal government to show Canadians their progressiveness.
“Time and again it was stressed that it was not a law, not a piece of legislation, but a mere motion. It therefore mandated precisely nothing. It had no penalties for people who choose to ignore it, brought into being no requirements in action,” Murphy wrote, “So, it must be presumed, its point was merely to place on parliamentary record the sentiment of the House of Commons on a sensitive matter.”
The motion was introduced by Mississauga-Erin Mills Liberal MP Iqra Khalid on Dec. 5, 2016. The motion mandates for the government to do three things: “Condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination, to end the increasing public climate of hate and fear, including hate speech and crimes, and compel the House of Commons heritage committee to develop a government-wide approach for reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia.”
The last point would require the heritage committee to keep tabs and collect data on hate crime reports, conduct needs assessments for affected communities of discrimination, and present those findings within eight months.“I’m really happy that the vote today has shown positive support for this motion and I’m really looking forward to the committee taking on this study,” Khalid said, speaking to reporters after the motion was passed last Thursday.
The Liberals rejected the opposition’s attempt by Saskatchewan Conservative MP David Anderson to remove the word “Islamophobia” from the motion, according to an article published by CBC. Anderson put forth word-change to note that the motion “Condemn all forms of systemic racism, religious intolerance and discrimination of Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus and other religious communities.”
A survey published March 23 by the Angus Reid Institute reported that 42 per cent of Canadians would vote against the motion, while only 29 per cent would vote in favour of it. Around two-thirds of Conservative votes were against the passing of M-103. Liberals’ and New Democrats’ opinions were also divided.
Further, the poll suggested scepticism of the motion: a majority of respondents believe it will have no effect, while 31 per cent believe it is a threat to freedom of speech, and only 12 percent believe it will help reduce anti-muslim attitudes and discrimination.
The survey was conducted in March of 2016, interviewing 1,511 Canadian adults.
Photo by Alisdare Hickson.