Why Outremont's Jewish community is vowing to fight a ban on new places of worship
by Brent Bambury (@notrexmurphy)
The Montreal borough of Outremont, a cosmopolitan and urban neighbourhood, home to many of the city's francophone elite, has an uncomfortable history with its largest and most visible minority. Hasidic Jews constitute about a quarter of the population.
Some claim the Hasidim aren't integrated into the wider community. And there are instances of conflict in daily life as the religious minority jostles with a fiercely secular population.
A controversy over a request to the YMCA for tinted windows was seen as accommodation, a major obstacle for proponents of Quebec's Charter of Values. Business owners fear an expansion of Hasidim services will make Outremont's streets less attractive to new business.
City ordinances have targeted some of the religious practices of the Hasidim, including the building of sukkahs, a temporary ceremonial hut. City officials clashed with the community over another ceremonial measure, a nearly invisible wire the Hasidim erect to mark religious boundaries.
Last weekend, the controversial ban was subjected to a referendum, and voters upheld the ban. They'd likely been swayed by a pro-business argument, which is the case made by the mayor.
But Max Lieberman, a long time member of Outremont's Hasidic Jewish community, says that's nonsense, and anyone who voted to defend Outremont's business interests was misled.
"They were unfortunately lured by a small group of instigators that were able to create a smokescreen that this is about revitalizing commercial streets," he told me on CBC Day 6.
He says the city is unable to prove a synagogue would be detrimental to commercial activity.
"We went to the city council. We kept on asking for consultations. We kept on asking if they can get an independent study to prove that banning synagogues on commercial streets would revitalize the street. But they refused to negotiate, to have any dialogue or to produce any studies confirming this argument."
"This is about pushing the Orthodox Jewish community from Outremont."
Not a recent conflict
The borough has used the argument before. Seventeen years ago a ban was implemented on another main street.
"This borough has a history. It started in 1999 when there was a request for a synagogue on Van Horne Street. The city, right after that, the month after that banned all synagogues on Van Horne," Lieberman recalls.
He says the ban on Van Horne has not made the street more attractive to business.
"Look at Van Horne. There has been a ban since 1999, how did that work out? Is Van Horne better? Of course not."
"So the notion that synagogues would harm commercial streets just is total smokescreen."
The bylaw extends the ban on Van Horne to two main streets, Laurier and Bernard. Presumably, this opens the rest of the borough to the possibility of construction, but Max Lieberman doesn't see it that way. He's waiting for a signal from the borough that would assure his community a new synagogue is welcome.
"The fact is, that bylaw that was passed, as of now, did not open any new street. So the burden is on the city to prove that they want to open new streets. [What] they only did now is ban all of Outremont. There's no new synagogue, and the city has a history."
A Charter case for a religious minority
I asked Max Lieberman about the often repeated criticism of his community, that the Hasidim are insular and don't integrate. He rejects that idea.
"There's been a change in our community", he says.
"For example, in our school our younger children speak fluent French whereas the older generation was not the case. But what they are asking is assimilation and that should never be something that they can ask for. Sure that we should integrate."
He says the tension in Outremont is not born of Quebec's Charter debate, or the nativism inflamed by the U.S. election. It is something older and familiar to minorities around the world.
"This is a worldwide phenomenon that always happened and will always happen where majorities will try to enforce their opinion on minorities. And in Canada where we have a Charter of Rights, this should never happen."
"The essence of a democracy is that the minority is protected from the majority. We have inalienable rights… and religious freedom is one of them. So to the notion that if they disagree on something you can use the force of the law, that is not democracy."
Max Lieberman says his community is prepared to make a Charter case of this issue. They have legal opinions which favour their argument.
But if the democratic decision made by Outremont voters in the referendum is overturned by a judicial one, how does he think that will affect his community's relations with the majority?
"We've said from the beginning: there's no winners in this referendum, that's why we didn't want it. This is divisive and will stay that way. We hope to do more outreach, and more explanation to the community. And be able to be better neighbours and live better together."