sign in sign up
<<
Home , Calgary Declaration, Jean Lesage, Robert Bourassa

QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES

FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001

tatement by , Prime Nearly two years later, no tangible S Minister of Québec, following the change has occurred. Last Sunday, Saskat- Meeting of the First Ministers in , chewan Premier Roy Romanov, a veteran Québec, September 16, 1997. of these discussions, readily acknowledged ••• the situation when he stated that had nothing new to offer those Quebecers proposing sovereignty. “We have nothing,” [Translation] he said. Nearly two years ago, on October 30, The English-Canadian premiers spent 1995, more than nine Quebecers out of 11 hours together. They consulted the leaders ten left their homes to participate in the of the opposition in their respective prov- greatest democratic exercise we have inces and federal politicians. Each of the ever known, i.e. a referendum on Québec’s English-speaking premiers assembled in future. Nearly one Quebecer out of two Calgary last Sunday was aware of the obsti- was sufficiently confident in the ability of nate opposition of his voters to any proposal our people, sufficiently discontented with that would give Québec additional powers Québec’s place in Canada, and sufficiently or special status. Each of the English- opposed to the Canadian status quo, to Canadian premiers knew that he would be vote in favour of Québec’s sovereignty, going out on a limb if he proposed the accompanied by an offer of partnership. recognition of the Québec people, that he Among those who voted No, many would immediately lose the confidence of individuals also rejected the status quo his voters. and voted for the changes promised by Painfully, together, they produced a federalist leaders. These No voters believed document that is the only possible response the declarations of love of hundreds of by Canada to the 1995 referendum vote. I thousands of and their premiers. do not doubt that my colleagues from Sovereignist voters and numerous feder- Canada did their utmost to act and made alists shared a strong desire for change. The the maximum possible use of their leeway. common denominator can be summarized Consequently, the Calgary declaration succinctly: all of these Quebecers wanted represents the absolute maximum that to exercise greater control over their affairs, Canada can offer Quebecers. i.e. to obtain more powers for Québec, and Now that Québec voters know what they hoped to obtain recognition of their Canada is prepared to offer in response to status as a people. the referendum vote, we must ask ourselves Most of the No voters wanted more pow- two questions. ers for Québec and recognition by Canada, First, does the offer contain more powers while Yes voters wanted all powers and for Québec? Would Quebecers, to repeat international recognition. the most popular slogan of our history, be The day after the referendum, news- “masters in [their] own house” to an even papers the world over noted that Canada greater extent? had received a sharp warning and that it Absolutely not. To the contrary, were must quickly instigate major changes in this offer to be implemented, we would be order to satisfy Quebecers. Failure to do so, “masters in our own house” to a lesser it was said in the world’s capitals, would extent that we are now. For the first time mean that Quebecers would ultimately opt in a document of this kind, the premiers for sovereignty. are inviting the federal government to

184 QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES

FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001

encroach on what remains of our autonomy observers wonder a few years from now and to take charge of our social programs. why these two peoples were unable to For nearly 40 years, , Daniel continue to live under the same federal Johnson, Sr., , René Lévesque regime, the answer will be, above all, a lack and have demanded that of respect and recognition and the refusal the federal government allow us to manage of one of the two peoples to recognize the our social programs according to our own existence of the other. priorities and in our own way, as stipulated Why is it so difficult for our Canadian in the 1867 Constitution, the original pact neighbours to describe us in the same terms between the two founding peoples. as they use to describe the other peoples Since Sunday, the premiers of the of the world? The British government has English-speaking provinces have been just recognized the “proud historic nation” proposing exactly the opposite. of Scotland. Quebecers have formally That is all, with respect to Québec’s recognized the aboriginal nations living in powers. There is nothing else, only a major Québec. We have always recognized the retreat. The Allaire Report, the program existence of the English-Canadian people. of the Québec Liberal Party, demanded 22 There is a deep-seated refusal among exclusive powers for Québec. Canada is our neighbours to return the courtesy. This offering nothing. Worse still, it is proposing refusal appears to harden with the passing to curtail Québec’s power over family and of each year and each decade. The stronger health policy and everything that reflects the Québec people becomes, the more Québec’s social solidarity. dynamic and economically solid, the less Former Québec Premier Robert Bourassa inclined our neighbours are to recognize us. described the as the At the outset, Canada was said to have most limited conditions that Québec had two founding peoples. During the 1960s, ever accepted, although the agreement did Canadian Prime Minister Lester Pearson give Québec authority over immigration retreated somewhat by asserting that and the power to make appointments to Québec made up a nation, although inside the Supreme Court, among other things. the Canadian nation. In the 1970s, this Other powers were to be added subsequent- observation was further diluted: Ottawa ly during a second round of negotiations. refused to speak of a people or a nation Today, in the Calgary declaration, there and Québec’s presence was more subtly is nothing. suggested by the term “duality.” In the in 1992, The 1980s saw a further retreat. Gone the federalists at least pretended to grant was the notion of duality, although some Québec various powers. What Quebecers English Canadians were still willing to rejected as being too little, Canada still describe Québec as a . Many regards as being too much. Today, Canada Quebecers believed that this minimal is suggesting that we relinquish some of recognition, were it accompanied by addi- our remaining powers. tional powers for Québec, could result in a Now for the second question that arises. compromise. However, nothing came of it. Does the document recognize the existence During the federal election last spring, of the Québec people? the Liberals and Conservatives proposed In my view, here we touch upon one of that the expression “distinct society” be the saddest facets of the history of relations revived, although their respective political between Quebecers and Canadians. When platforms stipulated that it did not mean

185 QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES

FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001

anything. Even this was too much for The Canadian premiers are so deter- Canadian voters and Jean Chrétien and mined to erase Québec’s existence as a neglected to talk about it nation that they even renamed our parlia- when campaigning in western Canada. mentary institution in their document. In recent months, even Daniel Johnson, Quebecers’ proudly call it the National leader of the Québec Liberal Party, has Assembly. They have banished the word tossed in the towel on the expression “dis- and talk about our “legislature.” It is as tinct society.” In Ontario, he launched a though they wanted to abolish our national sort of contest to see who could find other existence and make it disappear. words that would not offend English However, they do say that the language Canadians. of the majority, our culture and the Civil Saturday, even before the premiers’ Code make us unique. So what? What meeting in Calgary, he accepted what does that mean? What does it change? Canada had not yet proposed. He an- Nothing at all. nounced, very pleased, that he was going What a discovery! Quebecers are unique. to take all the credit for himself and his There is a temptation to add: just like every- party. He gave Canada a remarkable blank one else! Quebecers are unique like the cheque. What a sorry sight! Jean Lesage’s Regina Chorus or the rivière aux Escou- successor relinquished Québec’s character mins, the Skydome or Cape Breton, Labatt to the lowest bidder. In exchange, he Blue or Wayne Gretzky. obtained the assistance of politicians from It is as though, instead of recognizing Toronto, Fredericton and St. John’s for the existence of the aboriginal nations in his next election campaign in Québec. Québec, we had simply described their I believe that this is the first time that language and traditions. However, we a Leader of the Official Opposition in Québec have recognized the aboriginal peoples as has gone begging in for nations, which means that they exist as support for his party. Mr. Johnson has thus societies and have rights. It means that we become English Canada’s official candidate respect them. for the position of Québec Premier. The This is the difference that Canada pre- English-speaking provinces wrote his tends not to understand. We do not want political platform last Sunday in Calgary. a description of Quebecers. Bookstores are That is his strategy, the path he has chosen. full of them and we know what we are. I prefer to define Quebecers’ interests in We want to be recognized as a people, collaboration with Quebecers. since we are capable of assuming our des- Be that as it may, encouraged by tiny and development. Mr. Johnson, the English-Canadian pre- I note that the Calgary declaration miers scoured every dictionary available readily speaks of the “aboriginal peoples,” to find the most banal, empty words to but not of the Québec people. label us. They refuse to recognize us as a I see that our character is so specific people or a nation and are even afraid of that it is “fundamental for the well-being the vapid expression “distinct society.” The of Canada.” Does this mean that we do not English-Canadian prime ministers have have the right to leave Canada because its scraped the bottom of the barrel, where well-being depends on us? Does this they undoubtedly found “unique character,” expression make us socially unique but an all-purpose term if ever there was one. political eunuchs?

186 QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES

FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001

This brings me to another noteworthy A close examination of the Calgary facet of the Calgary declaration. You are declaration reveals that our Canadian well aware of the extent to which Québec neighbours want to diminish us. Canada’s has opened itself to the world in recent ambition is that Québec not be ambitious. years and broadened its relations with Two years ago, 49.4% of Quebecers other French-speaking nations and commu- voted in favour of sovereignty. This jolt nities and with the United States, Europe, was not sufficient to earn Québec respect Africa and Asia. On Friday, Québec City and recognition, much less control over will welcome parliamentarians from all its affairs. Two years ago, we mobilized all countries in North, Central and South of our energies to send our neighbours the America. broadest appeal for change in our history. Quebecers believe that this is our way Sunday, in Calgary, the English-speaking of developing. In Calgary, the premiers do premiers were clear. Canada will not make not see things the same way. Their decla- any of the changes sought by Quebecers. ration acknowledges that our “legislature” Ontario Premier Mike Harris was categor- (and not our “National Assembly”) protects ical: “We are not offering anything specific.” our unique character, but only “in Canada.” The premiers have shown, beyond a They have taken great care not to open any shadow of a doubt, that if Quebecers want door on the world and to avoid acknowl- to be recognized as the people that they edging Québec’s right to participate in the are, if they wish to control their destiny, great concert of nations. Everything falls there is only one course of action open to into line. According to the premiers, since them, i.e. for a majority of them to vote next we are not a nation, how can we claim to time for sovereignty. speak on our own behalf to other peoples? While English Canadians discuss among This clause clearly expresses English themselves whether the Calgary offer is Canada’s determination to keep us in line, sufficiently banal for their taste, in Québec to confine us to the equality of the prov- we will continue to carry out the tasks inces. It also reflects a desire to describe that we have collectively assumed, i.e. to Québec’s difference as outmoded and folk- create jobs for Quebecers, oversee the loric, one that is of no consequence for health and education networks, enhance our future. the conditions of Québec families, and Québec today is much more than the permanently eliminate the deficit in order Civil Code and the French language. It is a to stop running up debt that will be borne crossroads between the American and by Québec young people. French civilizations, a capital city clearly in We will continue to defend Québec de- tune with the Americas, Montréal, which has mocracy and institutions, without departing the highest proportion of high-technology from our objectives. We are doing so for jobs of any city on the continent, a French- Québec’s well being and to prepare the language culture increasingly enriched by Québec people for the major challenges its contacts with foreign countries, and an that await them. The Québec people will economy that exports more extensively on soon be better equipped to face the future international markets than it does in Canada. and will have an opportunity to recognize Every day and in numerous ways, itself and finally, calmly become the sover- Québec is emerging in the world. The pre- eign master of its destiny and present in miers meeting in Calgary want to imprison the world. it in its past. Source: Notes for a briefing.

187