Bloc MP: CHRC "must be carefully examined", "unpopular" opinions must be protected

France Bonsant is the Bloc Quebecois MP from Compton-Stanstead. Her office recently replied on her behalf to an inquiry by a constituent about Keith Martin's private member's motion to abolish section 13, the thought crimes provision of the Canadian Human Rights Act. You can read the entire exchange here. Some excerpts (with my favourite parts bolded):

...The Bloc Québécois is also concerned about upholding basic rights, including freedom of speech, which is fundamental in a democracy.

The Bloc Québécois is well aware of the concerns raised following the complaints filed with various human rights commissions. In our opinion, these commissions should not become tools for condemning legitimate opinions even if they are unpopular.

...While we need not wait for a crisis to act, we must choose our course of action carefully. Before powers are removed from the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Bloc Québécois is of the opinion that the full situation must be carefully examined and all the options weighed.

For instance, additional guidelines could be established regarding possible recourse before the Commission, by indicating cases that should be dismissed from the outset, to be sure not to eliminate recourse that could be very important in other cases.

As a result, the Bloc Québécois is not prepared to support motion M-446 at this time. We maintain that the issue should be more thoroughly examined in order to take an informed and appropriate approach.

It's not the full-throated call for reform that some other MPs have written, but I found it encouraging. It is not objectionable that an MP would wish to study a matter further before agreeing to abolish a particular law. While there is no easier excuse for non-action than a call for further study, I sense that this reply is genuine -- the debate about human rights commissions has largely been in the English language blogosphere and mainstream media. I don't regularly read the French language press, but I'm sure my Google alerts would be pinging if they were covering the subject. They haven't been.

In that context, it's like Bonsant and her Bloc colleagues are where the Anglo MPs were back in December -- the HRCs are barely on their political radar screen (I've written about two cases there: the Quebec HRC ordering a town council not to pray; and ordering a gay bar to allow straight women in. In other words, they're just as nutty out there.) I imagine that when a Montreal jihadi follows the example of Mohammed Elmasry and Syed Soharwardy, and hauls a Quebec critic of radical Islam before Quebec's HRC, the Bloc will more than catch up. In a way, Quebec's entire "reasonable accommodation" debate about radical Islam has been that province's parallel to English Canada's reaction to radical Islam in our HRCs. They're fed up.

I'm pleased that Bonsant -- and, if her letter is accurate, the Bloc Quebecois as a whole -- is interested in a review of the CHRC, with the spirit of freedom of speech in mind. That's exactly what Rick Dykstra has proposed to the Justice Committee. I don't expect the Bloc to take a leading role in that inquiry, but it's nice to know that, at worst, they'll come along for the ride.

Why not send a quick note of encouragement to Madame Bonsant, here.