A scathing reader's letter published in the Montreal Gazette argues that Quebec's latest secularism legislation has crossed into the realm of absurdity, resembling political satire more than sound public policy. The letter, a response to a December 9 column by Allison Hanes, takes aim at the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) government's Bill 9, suggesting its rules governing everyday life are laughable if they weren't so consequential.
The Fine Line of Festive Treats
The author, Lindi Ross of Carignan, opens with a pointed metaphor highlighting the bill's perceived contradictions. "We now live in a province where Christmas cookies are fine, so long as Baby Jesus isn’t baked into the dough," Ross writes. This sets the tone for a critique of a law that, in the writer's view, meticulously polices cultural and religious expressions in minute detail. Santa Claus is deemed acceptable, but any overt hint of faith becomes forbidden territory under the new rules.
The letter, published on December 18, 2025, references specific implications of the bill championed by Secularism Minister Jean-François Roberge. It notes that kosher meal options at institutions like the Jewish General Hospital must now be paired with non-kosher alternatives. Similarly, the provision of halal food in daycare settings is framed as a potential risk, with Ross sarcastically warning, "A four-year-old might accidentally interact with diversity."
Governing the Granular Details
Ross contends that with Bill 9, the CAQ is inserting itself deeply into the mundane aspects of daily life. The legislation is portrayed as dictating permissible songs in school hallways, dictating daycare lunch menus, and restricting hospital kitchen accommodations. These are not solutions to pressing issues, the letter argues, but rather "manufactured problems in search of victims."
The fundamental criticism is that a principle once intended to foster openness and equality—secularism—has been weaponized. "The CAQ has turned it into a bureaucratic crowbar to pry minorities out of public visibility," Ross states. The author finds it astonishing that a government often perceived as slow on files like housing, healthcare, and education exhibits "lightning-fast" efficiency when the focus shifts to regulating vulnerable communities.
Questioning Motives and Legacy
The letter suggests the government is acting with the anxious energy of a party aware its time in power may be limited, seeking to entrench discriminatory policies before its mandate ends. It poses a fundamental question: "If secularism is so fragile that it can be toppled by a Christmas carol or a kosher chicken breast, maybe the problem isn’t minority communities. It’s the government’s shaky understanding of secularism itself."
Ross highlights a profound hypocrisy: the CAQ claims to defend public "neutrality" while simultaneously injecting the matter of religion, and its strict policing, into every public sphere. The letter asks which Quebec values are truly being protected, questioning whether hospitality, fairness, or pluralism are served by the state rummaging through "your cultural pantry."
A more alarming undercurrent, according to the writer, is the bill's potential to erode democratic safeguards by targeting not just individuals but civil society institutions like universities and unions that hold government power to account. The combination of a government rushing legislation while weakening avenues for dissent is presented as a dangerous formula.
The letter concludes that the discriminatory nature of Bill 9 is explicit. The central question becomes why an outgoing government is working so diligently to ensure its damaging impact outlives its term. Ross asserts that Quebec needs leadership that solves real problems, not one that manufactures new ones to sustain cultural anxieties. The final verdict is blunt: "The CAQ can call this secularism all it wants, but many of us have a simpler word: bullying."
