part of meaningful public engagement is also educational. it is important for lawmakers to articulate their intent and process with a piece of legislation so that those affected can understand what the legislation is intended to do and so they are able to propose more effective or useful ways of addressing an issue.
stephanie carsley(left), vanessa gruben (middle), alanna catapan (right) supplied
some consultations on bill 2 are occurring. a few individuals and groups have appeared before a parliamentary committee, and there is a consultation form online where the public can submit comments. but there has been no public education, no transparency about consultations and no meaningful pre-drafting consultations.
the length of this timeline, and limited nature of the consultations, also means that only individuals and groups with the capacity to drop everything to work through a complex bill of over 100 pages and develop written comments on a dime can participate. groups and individuals with less time, and fewer resources will not be able to participate and to make their voices heard.
despite these concerns, there is one important reason to move an amended version of bill 2 through the national assembly without delay. the bill seeks to respond to a decision of the superior court of québec from last february that held that several provisions of the
civil code
of québec
violated the dignity and equality rights of trans and non-binary quebecers. the court gave the province until december 31, 2021 to amend the affected provisions.
the problem is that bill 2’s initial response to this court order has been widely criticized for its negative impact on the rights of trans and non-binary people — further highlighting the government’s failure to adequately consult with the lgbtq+ community prior to introducing the bill. it is also not clear why the government decided to include these proposed changes in a bill dealing primarily with family law.
3 minute read
