In an escalation of Quebec’s ongoing debate over secularism, the Quebec English School Boards Association (QESBA), the English Montreal School Board (EMSB), and Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) have condemned Bill 94. The QESBA have called it a “coercive and unnecessary intrusion” into public education and a threat to inclusion, professionalism, and local democracy.
Bill 94, formally titled “An Act to, in particular, reinforce laicity in the education network and to amend various legislative provisions,” was introduced by Education Minister, Bernard Drainville, and passed in the National Assembly in March 2025. The law’s central purpose is to strengthen laicity (laïcité), Quebec’s model of state secularism that emphasises a strict separation between religion and public institutions, within the school system. It extends the ban on religious symbols to all school staff, requires students and staff to keep their faces uncovered during school hours, and imposes stricter regulations on religious accommodations, demanding behaviour that aligns with Quebec’s notion of religious neutrality.
This legislation builds on Bill 21, adopted in 2019, which restricts certain public workers from wearing religious symbols. Bill 94 significantly broadens that scope, placing almost every staff member in the school network within its reach. The expanded scope of these restrictions has alarmed civil-liberties groups and advocates for minority rights.
QESBA argues that Bill 94 does far more than restrict religious freedom. The organization claims the law undermines the foundations of English-language public education in Quebec. One of the primary concerns expressed by QESBA is the centralisation of authority: the bill transfers greater power to the Ministry of Education, weakening the autonomy of locally elected school boards. QESBA maintains that this shift erodes constitutional protections, specifically Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which grants Quebec’s English- speaking minority the right to manage and control its own schools.
The association also denounces the bill as an act of ideological overreach. QESBA President, Joe Ortona, warned that Bill 94 replaces professional judgment and classroom autonomy with a rigid, government-mandated vision of “Quebec values.” Bill 94 limits religious accommodations, enforces face uncovering, and enables the use of override clauses that suspend key protections in both the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Charter. QEBSA argues that these measures suppress diversity of thought and endanger the pluralistic ethos on which public education should rest.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) has echoed these concerns, denouncing Bill 94 as a “threat to civil liberties.” It warns that the law undermines fundamental freedoms by cutting back religious accommodations and prohibiting visible prayer in schools, raising serious concerns about freedom of expression and religion. The CCLA is particularly troubled by the government’s reliance on the notwithstanding clause, which shields the legislation from constitutional challenges, and has raised concerns that the bill dangerously weakens the rights of vulnerable groups, including women, racialised communities, and religious minorities.
QESBA reiterates that by placing decision-making power in the hands of the Ministry of Education, the law threatens the democratic legitimacy of school boards and undermines the minority community’s ability to run its own institutions. The use of the notwithstanding clause further complicates any potential legal challenge, effectively closing off ordinary avenues of recourse.
Bill 94 has been primarily supported by the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) government, in addition to some members of the Parti Québécois.
The bill has been put into effect immediately, with schools responsible for enforcing its requirements. Students and staff are required to keep their faces uncovered and not display religious symbols. A refusal to comply potentially results in the loss of school services. The law includes eliminating menus adapted for religious dietary restrictions, prohibiting religious leave, and banning religious practices on school property outside class time. Together, these measures aim to standardize school policies by removing religious accommodations and setting uniform rules for conduct and services.
Since the bill’s introduction on October 30, many school boards have raised concerns regarding staffing difficulties, as support personnel may be unwilling or unable to comply with strict bans on religious symbols. Distrust between school boards, teachers, and the ministry could erode centralised directives to replace local decision-making. The Federation of Education Unions (CSQ), have raised concerns that students and staff from religious minorities may feel excluded or punished simply for expressing their faith. They also expressed concern that, as more power shifts upward, the role of democratically elected English-language school boards risks being diminished.
Bill 94 has brought to light a broader debate in Quebec over secularism, minority rights, and the definition of collective values. For many English- speaking Quebecers, the legislation reignites longstanding anxieties about losing control over their school system and watching cultural and linguistic rights erode. For civil-liberties advocates, it marks a troubling expansion of state authority at the expense of personal freedoms.