Affected employers include schools, hospitals, universities, daycares
The Quebec government has tabled new legislation that would further tighten secularism rules in public institutions, extending restrictions on religious symbols, prayer spaces and religiously based services in workplaces such as daycares, schools, universities and hospitals.
Premier François Legault’s Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) government introduced Bill 9, titled An Act respecting the reinforcement of laicity in Quebec, on Thursday.
The bill would apply to a wide range of publicly funded environments, with direct implications for hiring, workplace policies and religious accommodation practices in Quebec’s public and parapublic sectors.
Jean-François Roberge, Quebec’s minister responsible for secularism, said the legislation is intended to advance the province’s longstanding objective of ensuring the “religious neutrality of the state” and “equality for all citizens,” CBC reports.
“We think that when the state is neutral, Quebecers are free,” Roberge said at a news conference. He rejected the notion that religious minorities are being unfairly targeted, adding, “We have the same rules applying to everyone.”
The Quebec government has announced plans to ban religious symbols for daycare workers in October.
The bill invokes the notwithstanding clause pre-emptively, which would shield it from challenges under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to CBC. This step signals the government’s expectation of legal and constitutional opposition.
Key proposed measures in Quebec
Here are the key proposed measures in Bill 9, “An Act respecting the reinforcement of laicity in Québec”:
| No. | Area | Key Proposed Measure | Who/What Is Affected |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scope of laicity | Extends State laicity obligations to more bodies: childcare centres, subsidized daycares, home childcare coordinating offices and providers, many subsidized private educational institutions, private health institutions under agreement, intermediate and family-type resources, and other listed bodies. Personnel must not favour or disfavour anyone based on religion or non‑religion, subject to narrow exceptions. | Public institutions and subsidized/contracted childcare, education, health and social services bodies; their personnel. |
| 2 | Uncovered face requirement | Requires people to have their face uncovered in places under the authority of certain public/educational bodies and when receiving services from them, including educational, training and professional development services, and whenever needed for identity verification or security. Refusal means the service cannot be provided, with limited exceptions (e.g., private homes, some off‑hours situations). | Users of services and persons present in premises under the authority of listed bodies (e.g., higher education, childcare, some other public bodies). |
| 3 | Religious practice in public institutions | As a default rule, prohibits religious practice (any action manifesting a religious belief, other than simply wearing a symbol) in places under the authority of institutions and bodies covered by the laicity law. Allows specific exceptions (health and social services settings where practice doesn’t impair care/operations, correctional facilities, private residences, certain Indigenous cultural practices, and some other regulated cases). | Spaces (buildings/rooms) under authority of covered institutions; users and staff engaging in religious practices there. |
| 4 | Religious practice in educational institutions | Prohibits religious practice such as overt prayers in certain educational institutions during hours devoted to educational services under the basic school regulation. Allows religious activities as optional activities outside those hours, and allows wearing religious symbols during those optional activities. | Students and staff in institutions covered by school basic regulations, mainly subsidized private institutions. |
| 5 | Ban on religious symbols – expanded | Extends the existing ban on wearing religious symbols to: staff of childcare centres, subsidized daycares and home childcare coordinating offices; staff of subsidized private educational institutions and some service providers acting on their behalf; and persons providing services under government reception, francization or integration programs for immigrants. Provides “acquired rights” (grandfathering) so certain people already in these roles can keep their symbols if they stay in the same function/organization or under existing contracts. | Affected childcare and educational personnel, and service providers in immigration reception/francization/integration programs. |
| 6 | Institutional religious symbols and diets | Prohibits institutions/bodies covered by laicity rules from offering exclusively religiously‑based diets in restaurant/food services. Prohibits prominently displaying religious symbols in official communications, unless the symbol was already part of the institution’s logo or coat of arms before introduction of the bill. Forbids requiring students to wear a religious symbol, unless it was already part of the institution’s logo/coat of arms at that time. | Institutions and bodies covered by the Act respecting the laicity of the State; their food services, branding and student requirements. |
| 7 | Private education accreditation | Bars accreditation for private institutions where basic‑regulation educational services or childcare services are based on religious standards/precepts, on transmitting religious convictions/beliefs, or on religious practice; or where students or staff are selected/segregated on religious criteria. Gives the Minister of Education explicit power to revoke accreditation on these grounds, including on their own initiative, with transitional timing rules for renewals. | Private educational institutions seeking or holding accreditation; their admission criteria, HR practices and program basis. |
| 8 | New Act on religious neutrality in public space | Enacts a separate “Act to foster religious neutrality, in particular in the public space” that: (a) restricts collective religious practice on public roads and in public parks to exceptional, case‑by‑case municipal authorizations that meet conditions (safety, short duration, accessible to all, no undue obstruction); (b) protects religious worship by prohibiting interference with practice or access in places of worship; (c) creates a unified framework for religious‑ground accommodations in both public and private sectors. | Municipalities, organizers/participants of public religious events, places of worship, and all organizations receiving accommodation requests. |
| 9 | Religious accommodations – unified test | Sets detailed criteria for religious accommodations: request must be serious, consistent with equality and non‑discrimination, and must not impose more than minimal hardship (considering rights of others, health/safety, operations, costs). Prohibits accommodations whose purpose is to have a service delivered by someone of a particular sex/gender identity/expression, except for medical care or services involving physical contact. Requires the requester’s cooperation in finding reasonable solutions. | Employers, schools, childcare providers, colleges/universities, and other organizations processing religious accommodation requests. |
| 10 | Context‑specific accommodation limits | Adds tailored limits for specific contexts: for staff absences (duration/frequency, impact on operations and colleagues, unit size/flexibility, fairness, etc.); for children in childcare (cannot compromise quality, educational program, health/safety/well‑being); for school students (cannot compromise compulsory attendance, basic regulations, school mission/project, or the institution’s ability to provide required services); for CEGEPs, private colleges and universities (cannot compromise service delivery, program objectives/requirements, or academic freedom). | HR/management in public and private sector; childcare services; public and certain private schools; CEGEPs, colleges, universities. |
| 11 | Minister Responsible for Laicity – role & powers | Formally creates a Minister Responsible for Laicity. The minister must promote and oversee laicity principles, advise/assist institutions, issue binding directives (once approved and published) on applying both the laicity Act and the new neutrality Act, and verify compliance (including on‑site inspections, document requests, and recordings). May order corrective and follow‑up measures, sometimes jointly with sectoral ministers. | Minister Responsible for Laicity; all bodies covered by the laicity and neutrality Acts. |
| 12 | Heritage, existing religious‑use agreements & ceremonies | Clarifies that institutions/bodies cannot build or install religiously promotional structures or adornments, except as part of conservation/restoration projects. Protects certain pre‑existing agreements allowing continued religious use in buildings acquired from religious owners, so long as agreements were in place before a specified date and remain unchanged. States that laicity rules do not bar elected officials or institutional representatives from attending ceremonies that include a religious component. | Institutions and bodies owning or acquiring former religious buildings; elected officials and institutional representatives attending ceremonies. |
| 13 | Override clauses & repeal of prior laws | Provides that the neutrality Act applies despite key sections of Québec’s Charter of human rights and freedoms and has effect notwithstanding sections 2 and 7–15 of the Constitution Act, 1982 (explicit use of the “notwithstanding clause”). Repeals the Freedom of Worship Act and the previous Act on adherence to State religious neutrality, replacing them with this new framework. | Legal/constitutional framework for rights challenges; prior religious‑freedom/neutrality statutes. |
| 14 | Entry into force & transition | Staggers implementation: some provisions (e.g., parts of the uncovered‑face obligation and religious‑practice ban in certain settings) take effect on 1 September 2026; new private‑education accreditation revocation rules take effect three years after assent; transitional clauses soften the immediate impact on existing accreditations and certain existing employment/contract situations (“acquired rights”). | Implementation timelines for institutions, employees, service providers and regulators. |
Criticism of Bill 9 restrictions
The extension of the religious symbols ban to subsidised daycare workers has drawn concern from childcare providers.
Maria English, executive director of a public daycare network with five locations and more than 300 children, told CBC the measure would disproportionately affect Muslim women and make recruitment more difficult.
“A religious symbol does not determine how you will be with the children, so it will take away some very nurturing educators,” English said.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association noted that Quebec’s Bill 9 “attacks fundamental freedoms and the right to equality by almost completely banning collective religious practice in public and limiting the right to peacefully protest near places of worship.”
“Through yet another invocation of the notwithstanding clauses, the Quebec government is perpetuating the shameful legacy of exclusion initiated by Bill 21, which the CCLA is currently challenging before the Supreme Court of Canada,” the group said via LinkedIn.
“Bill 9 must be withdrawn. The Quebec government must stop weaponizing its distorted view of secularism as a political tool.”
Previously, one committee called for action from the Quebec government to address what it described as a growing presence of religion in some institutions in the province.
