Clarity sought in language legislation

The devil is in the details as the saying goes.

And for the Quebec Association of Independent Schools it’s the regulations that accompany Bill 115 that are problematic.

The association, which represents schools such as Lower Canada College and Selwyn House, calls the newly adopted law a step in the right direction.

But it argues the point system that will be used to determine English school eligibility for students who have attended unsubsidized private English schools is too complicated.

“What we’re asking for is clarity,” QAIS spokesperson Jonathan Goldbloom said.

Without it, confusion may arise and more court challenges might pop up, he said.

Bill 115 is the Quebec government’s response to the Supreme Court striking down Bill 104, which reduced access to English schools.

The regulations adopted by cabinet yesterday are virtually identical to those released for the bill it replaced – Bill 103, the government says.

Students who aren’t eligible for English public school can be considered for that option after spending at least three years at an approved unsubsidized private English school. They’ll need 15 points to qualify, which they would accumulate over three years at an approved school.

But government bureaucrats would still have to judge whether their English “educational pathway” was genuine. They could add or subtract points for other factors. For example, students could lose points if they had also attended a French school.

As an example of a conflict that might crop up, Gold-bloom offered this scenario: A family originally from the United States sends their child to French school for Grade 1. It doesn’t work out and they transfer their child to an English unsubsidized school for the next five years. But at the end of Grade 6, the child can’t continue in an English school “because they won’t have enough points,” Goldbloom said.

The association says it also objects to bureaucrats having “broad discretionary powers to award demerit points.”

“Clearly the regulations were designed to make it as difficult as possible,”

Goldbloom said. “And that’s contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court.”

Goldbloom alluded to a comment in June by former Education Minister Michelle Courchesne. “I won’t deny that the objective is to have as few as possible (approved),” Courchesne told Gazette columnist Don Macpherson at the time.

“It seems to me you should have some certainty to the thing,” Goldbloom said.

If the government had left the requirement at three years it would have provided “tremendous clarity” for everyone and he would not have recommended the law be challenged, Montreal lawyer Brent Tyler said. However, Tyler said he believes the new law is unconstitutional and he expects it will be contested in court. “This attempt to look at the authentic pathway – the way that it works – I think, will be found wanting.”