DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Opinion on Asymmetrical Federalism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Opinion on Asymmetrical Federalism PUBLIC OPINION ON ASYMMETRICAL FEDERALISM: GROWING OPENNESS OR “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you CONTINUING AMBIGUITY? can make words mean so many different things.” F. Leslie Seidle Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland Centre for Research and Information on Canada and Institute for Research on Public Policy In politics, words can be used for good or ill; they can help clarify complex public policy Gina Bishop issues or baffle even well-informed citizens. At Centre for Research and Information on Canada different times and in different contexts, the expression ‘asymmetrical federalism’ has Foreword probably performed all of these functions and others. Some have used it to describe what they The federal Liberal Party’s 2004 general see as a strength of Canadian federalism, namely election platform heavily emphasized issues that that provinces are not identical in their history, are mainly subject to provincial competence circumstances and public policies. Others have under the constitution (e.g. health care, child used the term to express their opposition to the care, cities). Since the federal government lacks ‘special treatment’ they believe one province, the authority to implement detailed regulatory namely Quebec, seeks – or already receives - schemes in these areas, acting on these election within the federation. Still others claim that even commitments frequently requires federal- modest asymmetry, such as variation in provincial-territorial (FPT) agreements. intergovernmental agreements (as opposed to the A controversial question that arises when letter of the Constitution), violates the principle considering all intergovernmental agreements is of the equality of the provinces. whether they should treat all provinces and territories similarly or whether the agreements Largely because of the association with should be expected to differ from one Quebec, politicians and policy makers have province/territory to another. This issue of tended to avoid using the term ‘asymmetrical symmetry or asymmetry arises at two levels. The federalism’ in their speeches, official statements first is whether all provinces should be and or intergovernmental agreements. That trend should be viewed as “equal” in legal and was broken, however, on September 16, 2004 constitutional terms. The second relates to the political and administrative level and the when a communiqué titled “Asymmetrical intergovernmental agreements it generates. When federalism that respects Quebec’s jurisdiction” should Canadians expect all provinces/territories was released along with the Health Accord to be treated similarly in these agreements and agreed to by all First Ministers. The when should difference be the rule? communiqué reflected the agreement between Prime Minister Martin and Premier Jean Charest Given this political context, it is timely to that the Quebec government would use the reconsider the factors that are relevant to the additional funding from the Health Accord “to issue of symmetry and asymmetry. We are doing implement its own plan for renewing Quebec’s this by publishing a series of short commentaries health system” and that it “will report to over the first half of 2005. These papers will explore the different dimensions of this issue- the Quebecers on progress in achieving its historical, the philosophical, the practical, the objectives” and on ‘the use of all health comparative (how other federations deal with funding.” The communiqué also stated that the asymmetrical pressures), and the empirical. We elements of the agreement that applied only to do this in the hope that the series will help Quebec were based on asymmetrical federalism, improve the quality of public deliberation on this “that is, flexible federalism that allows for the issue. existence of specific agreements and arrangements adapted to Quebec’s specificity.” Harvey Lazar Director Asymmetry Series 2005 (2) © IIGR, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University Leslie Seidle and Gina Bishop, Public Opinion on Asymmetrical Federalism: In the first section of this article we present respondents indicated they were very or public opinion data from autumn 2004 on the somewhat satisfied with the agreement; only Health Accord, including the provisions that 18% were somewhat or very dissatisfied. apply only to Quebec, and on the question of Moreover, there was not a great deal of variation potential differences in agreements between the by region: the highest satisfaction levels were in federal and provincial governments. In the the Atlantic provinces and the Prairies – 82% in second section, we explore what may be the both cases; the lowest levels were in Ontario and roots of many Canadians’ continuing antipathy Quebec – 76% in each province (see Figure 1). to particular arrangements between the federal government and Quebec by reviewing findings In the same Focus Canada survey, from public opinion surveys since the late 1980s respondents were asked the following question: on the attempts to recognise Quebec’s “The agreement exempts Quebec from some of distinctiveness in the Constitution and related the new provincial requirements for reporting on issues. The analysis suggests that, although the the use of these health care funds. Do you term ‘asymmetrical federalism’ can be approve or disapprove of Quebec having Figure 1: Satisfaction with 2004 Health Care Accord, 100 by region 90 80 82 82 81 70 76 76 60 50 40 30 20 19 21 10 15 14 16 0 Atl. QC ON Prairies BC Satisfied Dissatisfied As you may have heard, Prime Minister Paul Martin and the 10 provincial premiers recently signed an agreement about health care programs and funding. This calls for the federal government to give the provinces 18 billion dollars in new health care funding over the next six years, within a framework of accountability on how this new money is spent by the provinces. From what you know or have heard, are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with this agreement on health care? (Source: Environics Focus Canada, Report 2004-3, Q 32) seen as a synonym for flexibility within the exemptions in this new health care agreement federation, a reality that does not seem to excite which are not specifically provided to other much opposition, for some it remains linked to provinces?” In all parts of Canada except the issue of ‘special treatment’ for Quebec. Quebec, the results were almost the mirror of the general question about the accord. In British CURRENT VIEWS ON ASYMMETRICAL Columbia, 85% of those surveyed indicated they ARRANGEMENTS disapproved of the ‘exemptions’; the next- The Health Accord announced on highest level of opposition – 79% - was in September 16, 2004 met with a high level of Ontario. In Quebec, just over a majority of approval from Canadians. In an Environics respondents (55%) approved of the provisions Focus Canada survey carried out between that applied only to Quebec (see Figure 2). September 23 and October 12, 2004, 78% of Asymmetry Series 2005 (2) © IIGR, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University 2 Leslie Seidle and Gina Bishop, Public Opinion on Asymmetrical Federalism: Figure 2: Approval/Disapproval of Quebec Exemptions in 2004 Health Accord, by region 100 90 80 85 79 70 77 60 67 50 55 40 39 30 20 26 19 10 17 12 0 Atl. QC ON Prairies BC Approve Disapprove The agreement exempts Quebec from some of the new provincial requirements for reporting on the use of these health care funds. Do you approve or disapprove of Quebec having exemptions in this new health care agreement which are not specifically provided to other provinces? (Source: Environics Focus Canada, Report 2004-3, Q 33) It should be said that the wording of the carried out between September 15 and October 4 statement that preceded the question could give outside Quebec and between September 16 and the impression the Quebec government will not October 3 in Quebec.) Respondents were told be required to report on the use of the health that agreements between the federal and care funds; in reality, it agreed to respect certain provincial governments can differ from one reporting requirements to its own population. province to another and then asked whether they Even so, the high level of disapproval of the were “in favour of having different agreements provisions that applied to Quebec but no other depending on the province or identical province suggest that this practical example of agreements with all provinces.” Nationally, 52% asymmetrical federalism was not well received of those surveyed were in favour and 45% elsewhere in the country. against (Figure 3). This pattern was fairly constant across the country: a bare majority A different pattern was evident in the (50% in all cases) favoured identical agreements responses to a question in the 2004 Portraits of in Nova Scotia, Ontario and Manitoba; in all Canada survey sponsored by the Centre for other provinces and the North, there was Research and Information on Canada (CRIC). stronger support for different agreements than (The fieldwork for the Portraits survey was identical ones (see Figure 4) Asymmetry Series 2005 (2) © IIGR, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University 3 Leslie Seidle and Gina Bishop, Public Opinion on Asymmetrical Federalism: Figure 3: Different or Identical Federal-Provincial Agreements? 2004 100 90 In favour of different 80 agreements 70 60 In favour of identical agreements 50 52 40 45 30 20 10 0 Some people think that certain agreements between the federal and provincial governments can differ from one province to another. Others oppose this, preferring identical agreements with all provinces. Personally, are you in favour of having DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS depending on the province or IDENTICAL AGREEMENTS with all provinces? Is that strongly or somewhat in favor? (Source: CRIC Portraits of Canada 2004) Figure 4: Different/Identical Federal-Provincial Agreements 70 2004, by region 60 59 55 55 56 55 53 50 50 52 50 49 50 48 48 48 48 44 44 40 42 42 43 39 37 30 20 10 0 NL NS PE NB QC ON MB SK AB BC North In favour of different agreements In favour of identical agreements Some people think that certain agreements between the federal and provincial governments can differ from one province to another.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada
    Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 31 Issue 1 Volume 31, Number 1 (Spring 1993) Symposium: Towards the 21st Century Article 2 Canadian/Australian Legal Perspectives 1-1-1993 The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada Peter W. Hogg Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Special Issue Article This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Hogg, Peter W.. "The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 31.1 (1993) : 41-61. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol31/iss1/2 This Special Issue Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada Abstract The Charlottetown Accord of 1992 was a set of proposals for amendments to the Constitution of Canada. These proposals were designed to achieve a national settlement of a variety of constitutional grievances, chiefly those arising from Quebec nationalism, western regionalism, and Aboriginal deprivation. The Accord was defeated in a national referendum. In the case of Quebec, the defeat of the Charlottetown Accord, following as it did on the defeat of the Meech Lake Accord, has made the option of secession relatively more attractive, but there are sound pragmatic reasons to hope that Quebec will not make that choice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Government of Canada's Search for Environmental Legitimacy: 1971-2008 Douglas Macdonald
    Document generated on 09/24/2021 6:23 a.m. International Journal of Canadian Studies Revue internationale d’études canadiennes The Government of Canada's Search for Environmental Legitimacy: 1971-2008 Douglas Macdonald Culture — Natures in Canada Article abstract Culture — natures au Canada Although the term "greenwash" has now entered the language, there has Number 39-40, 2009 beenlittle academic analysis of environmental legitimacy as a factor in environmentalpolitics. This article examines claims to environmental URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/040829ar legitimacy made by theGovernment of Canada with respect to seven policy DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/040829ar initiatives. The most commonclaims have been: (1) action exceeds that of previous governments; (2) Canada isdoing more than other countries; (3) the policy will aid economy as well asenvironment (sustainable development); See table of contents and, (4) the transparent policy process isitself legitimate. Exaggeration and downplaying related action by the provinces areother common themes. Publisher(s) Conseil international d'études canadiennes ISSN 1180-3991 (print) 1923-5291 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this article Macdonald, D. (2009). The Government of Canada's Search for Environmental Legitimacy: 1971-2008. International Journal of Canadian Studies / Revue internationale d’études canadiennes, (39-40), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.7202/040829ar Tous droits réservés © Conseil international d'études canadiennes, 2009 This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit.
    [Show full text]
  • Charlottetown Accord
    Charlottetown Accord This article was written by a law student for the general public. Following the failure of the Meech Lake Accord in 1990, a series of deliberations took place on the future of Confederation both within and outside of Quebec. In fact, there were four bodies empanelled to engage in these discussions – a parliamentary and an extra-parliamentary body within Quebec and a parliamentary and an extra-parliamentary body nationally. Specifically, within Quebec, there were the Allaire Committee (see Allaire Report) and the Belanger- Campeau Committee; and nationally, there were the Beaudoin- Edwards Committee and the Spicer Commission. These studies led to various reports including the federal documentShaping Canada’s Future Together. Subsequently, the federal government convened a series of five national conferences to discuss various aspects of this document. This, in turn, led to a federal report entitled A Renewed Canada. All of the foregoing culminated in negotiations among the federal government, the provincial governments (including Quebec in the latter stages of negotiations), the territorial governments and representatives from the Assembly of First Nations, the Native Council of Canada, the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada and the Métis National Council. These negotiations resulted in what is now referred to as the ‘Charlottetown Accord’. The Accord dealt with a number of constitutional issues. For example, regarding the division of legislative powers (see division of powers), it provided for exclusive provincial jurisdiction over forestry, mining and some other areas. It also required the federal government to conduct negotiations with the provinces in order to “harmonize” policy in such areas as telecommunications, labour development and training, regional development and immigration.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative North Americas: What Canada and The
    ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS What Canada and the United States Can Learn from Each Other David T. Jones ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20004 Copyright © 2014 by David T. Jones All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, scanned, or distributed in any printed or electronic form without permission. Please do not participate in or encourage piracy of copyrighted materials in violation of author’s rights. Published online. ISBN: 978-1-938027-36-9 DEDICATION Once more for Teresa The be and end of it all A Journey of Ten Thousand Years Begins with a Single Day (Forever Tandem) TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1 Borders—Open Borders and Closing Threats .......................................... 12 Chapter 2 Unsettled Boundaries—That Not Yet Settled Border ................................ 24 Chapter 3 Arctic Sovereignty—Arctic Antics ............................................................. 45 Chapter 4 Immigrants and Refugees .........................................................................54 Chapter 5 Crime and (Lack of) Punishment .............................................................. 78 Chapter 6 Human Rights and Wrongs .................................................................... 102 Chapter 7 Language and Discord ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 105Th American Assembly on "U.S.-Canada
    The 105th American Assembly ENEWING THE U. S. ~ Canada R ELATIONSHIP The American Assembly February 3–6, 2005 475 Riverside Drive, Suite 456 Arden House New York, New York, 10115 Harriman, New York Telephone: 212-870-3500 Fax: 212-870-3555 E-mail: [email protected] www.americanassembly.org Canada Institute Canadian Institute The Woodrow Wilson CANADIAN INSTITUT INSTITUTE OF CANADIEN DES of International Affairs International Center for Scholars INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRES AFFAIRS INTERNATIONALES 205 Richmond Street West One Woodrow Wilson Plaza Suite 302 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. CIIA/ICAI Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5V 1V3 Washington, D.C. 20004-3027 Telephone: 416-977-9000 Telephone: 202-691-4270 Fax: 416-977-7521 Fax: 202-691-4001 www.ciia.org www.wilsoncenter.org/canada/ PREFACE On February 3, 2005, seventy women and men from the United States and Canada including government officials, representatives from business, labor, law, nonprofit organizations, academia, and the media gathered at Arden House in Harriman, New York for the 105th American Assembly entitled “U.S.-Canada Relations.” Assemblies had been sponsored on this topic in 1964 and 1984, and this third Assembly on bilateral relations was co-sponsored by the Canada Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, the Canadian Institute for International Affairs (CIIA), and The American Assembly of Columbia University. The participants, representing a range of views, backgrounds, and interests, met for three days in small groups for intensive, structured discussions to examine the concerns and challenges of the binational relationship. This Assembly was co-chaired by Allan Gotlieb, former Canadian ambassador to the United States, former under secretary of state for External Affairs, and senior advisor at Stikeman Elliot LLP in Toronto and James Blanchard, former U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • CONSTITUTION-MAKING AS INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS a Case Study of the 1980 Canadian Constitutional Negotiations Adam D
    CONSTITUTION-MAKING AS INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS A Case Study of the 1980 Canadian Constitutional Negotiations Adam D. McDonald1, University of Waterloo The Constitution Act, 1982 is a document that profoundly changed the Canadian political landscape. It brought home the highest law of the land; it provided Canadians a mechanism to change their Constitution; it created a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, entrenched within the Constitution, out of the reach of one government. Perhaps its most important legacies, however, are the seemingly permanent isolation of Quebec and the primacy of place in Canadian history it gave Pierre Trudeau. This paper will examine the constitutional history of Canada with a view to determining what made the 1980 negotiating sessions successful when the sessions that led to both the Meech Lake Accord and the Charlottetown Accord were not. It is important, however, to note that the word “successful” is used in the sense that an agreement was reached. Unlike Meech and Charlottetown, the repatriated constitution did not have unanimity among the participants. The question that comes to mind is this: if the governments did not really agree in 1981, why was a Constitution ratified? More importantly, are there lessons that can be drawn from this agreement that can be applied to the failed accords of the Mulroney era? In order to complete this examination, the paper will be divided into two parts. In the first part, Canada’s constitutional story will be told. This is a necessary part of any examination of the constitutional negotiations, for without knowing what the players wanted historically, one cannot see what was changed by the 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • Campbell Takes Office As Canada's First Female Premier June 26, 1993| from Reuters
    http://articles.latimes.com/1993-06-26/news/mn-7402_1_kim-campbell Campbell Takes Office as Canada's First Female Premier June 26, 1993| From Reuters OTTAWA — Kim Campbell, a 46-year-old lawyer, took office Friday as Canada's first female prime minister in a bold bid by the ruling Conservatives to recover popularity in time to win elections this year. Campbell, the first Canadian prime minister born after World War II, promised to restore Canadians' faith in government by bringing in a new generation of leaders to deal with severe unemployment and soaring government deficits. She quickly moved to distance herself from her unpopular predecessor, Brian Mulroney, by slashing the Cabinet size by almost one-third and reshuffling departments to focus on new jobs, public security and maintaining Canada's health service. "It is crucial to close the distance between Canadians and their government," she said after her swearing-in. "Canadians want their government to help them, not hinder them, in the process of economic renewal," she told a news conference. "A smaller Cabinet is a more efficient and more effective instrument to discuss, to decide, to lead." Mulroney retired as Canada's most disliked postwar leader after almost nine years in office to allow a fresh face to lead his party into a general election that must be called by November. Campbell named her main rival for leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party, Quebec native Jean Charest, as her deputy prime minister and minister of industry and consumer affairs. Charest was also charged with regional development in the French-speaking province that is key to winning a majority.
    [Show full text]
  • Fast Policy Facts
    Fast Policy Facts By Paul Dufour In collaboration with Rebecca Melville - - - As they appeared in Innovation This Week Published by RE$EARCH MONEY www.researchmoneyinc.com from January 2017 - January 2018 Table of Contents #1: January 11, 2017 The History of S&T Strategy in Canada ........................................................................................................................... 4 #2: January 18, 2017 Female Science Ministers .................................................................................................................................................... 5 #3: February 1, 2017 AG Science Reports ................................................................................................................................................................ 6 #4: February 8, 2017 The deadline approaches… ................................................................................................................................................. 7 #5: February 15, 2017 How about a couple of key moments in the history of Business-Education relations in Canada? .............. 8 #6: February 22, 2017 Our True North ........................................................................................................................................................................ 9 #7: March 8, 2017 Women in Science - The Long Road .............................................................................................................................. 11 #8: March 15, 2017 Reflecting on basic
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Separatism in Quebec
    1 Separatism in Quebec: Off the Agenda but Not Off the Minds of Francophones An Honors Thesis Submitted to the Department of Politics in Partial Fulfillment of the Honors Program By Sarah Weber 5/6/15 2 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction 3 Chapter 2. 4 Chapter 3. 17 Chapter 4. 36 Chapter 5. 41 Chapter 6. 50 Chapter 7. Conclusion 65 3 Chapter 1: Introduction-The Future of Quebec The Quebec separatist movement has been debated for decades and yet no one can seem to come to a conclusion regarding what the future of the province holds for the Quebecers. This thesis aims to look at the reasons for the Quebec separatist movement occurring in the past as well as its steady level of support. Ultimately, there is a split within the recent literature in Quebec, regarding those who believe that independence is off the political agenda and those who think it is back on the agenda. This thesis looks at public opinion polls, and electoral returns, to find that the independence movement is ultimately off the political agenda as of the April 2014 election, but continues to be supported in Quebec public opinion. I will first be analyzing the history of Quebec as well as the theories other social scientists have put forward regarding separatist and nationalist movements in general. Next I will be analyzing the history of Quebec in order to understand why the Quebec separatist movement came about. I will then look at election data from 1995-2012 in order to identify the level of electoral support for separatism as indicated by the vote for the Parti Quebecois (PQ).
    [Show full text]
  • The Meaning of Canadian Federalism in Québec: Critical Reflections
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Revistes Catalanes amb Accés Obert The Meaning of Canadian federalisM in QuébeC: CriTiCal refleCTions guy laforest Professor of Political Science at the Laval University, Québec SUMMARY: 1. Introdution. – 2. Interpretive context. – 3. Contemporary trends and scholarship, critical reflections. – Conclusion. – Bibliography. – Abstract-Resum-Re- sumen. 1. Introduction As a teacher, in my instructions to students as they prepare their term papers, I often remind them that they should never abdicate their judgment to the authority of one single source. In the worst of circum- stances, it is much better to articulate one’s own ideas and convictions than to surrender to one single book or article. In the same spirit, I would urge readers not to rely solely on my pronouncements about the meaning of federalism in Québec. In truth, the title of this essay should include a question mark, and its content will illustrate, I hope, the richness and diversity of current Québec thinking on the subject. There are many ways as well to approach the topic at hand. The path I shall choose will reflect my academic identity: I am a political theorist and an intellectual historian, keenly interested about the relationship between philosophy and constitutional law in Canada, hidden in a political science department. As a reader of Gadamer and a former student of Charles Taylor, I shall start with some interpretive or herme- neutical precautions. Beyond the undeniable relevance of current re- flections about the theory of federalism in its most general aspects, the real question of this essay deals with the contemporary meaning of Canadian federalism in Québec.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID's Collateral Contagion
    June 2020 COVID’s Collateral Contagion: Why Faking Parliament is No Way to Govern in a Crisis Christian Leuprecht The COVID-19 epidemic is the greatest test for the maintenance of Canada’s democratic constitutional order in at least 50 years, certainly since the October crisis of 1970. It is also a bellwether for the way the Canadian state manages risk. Risks that stem from globalization have a common denominator: by definition, no state can manage them alone. However, citizens still expect their state to act. Confronted with dire predictions of immi- nent Armageddon, politicians invoke largely performative measures to signal to citizens that they are acting – to manage a risk that is largely beyond their control. Managing risk has become to individual citizens the essence of the modern welfare state: unemployment insur- ance, health care insurance, mortgage insurance, etc. Such is the essence of “risk society”: the expectations by citizens that the state will manage risks, many of which the state cannot control, such as a global pandemic. Paradoxically, the less control and certainty the state has over a risk that is perceived as existential, the more heavy-handed is its approach. Precisely because of the threatening environment in which it exists and because it is shut out of many international organizations, Taiwan was well prepared for the pandemic and its reaction was measured. By contrast, much of the rest of the democratic world was ill-prepared, which explains the heavy-handed measures taken by many of these countries, including Canada. The author of this document has worked independently and is solely responsible for the views presented here.
    [Show full text]
  • The Roots of French Canadian Nationalism and the Quebec Separatist Movement
    Copyright 2013, The Concord Review, Inc., all rights reserved THE ROOTS OF FRENCH CANADIAN NATIONALISM AND THE QUEBEC SEPARATIST MOVEMENT Iris Robbins-Larrivee Abstract Since Canada’s colonial era, relations between its Fran- cophones and its Anglophones have often been fraught with high tension. This tension has for the most part arisen from French discontent with what some deem a history of religious, social, and economic subjugation by the English Canadian majority. At the time of Confederation (1867), the French and the English were of almost-equal population; however, due to English dominance within the political and economic spheres, many settlers were as- similated into the English culture. Over time, the Francophones became isolated in the province of Quebec, creating a densely French mass in the midst of a burgeoning English society—this led to a Francophone passion for a distinct identity and unrelent- ing resistance to English assimilation. The path to separatism was a direct and intuitive one; it allowed French Canadians to assert their cultural identities and divergences from the ways of the Eng- lish majority. A deeper split between French and English values was visible before the country’s industrialization: agriculture, Ca- Iris Robbins-Larrivee is a Senior at the King George Secondary School in Vancouver, British Columbia, where she wrote this as an independent study for Mr. Bruce Russell in the 2012/2013 academic year. 2 Iris Robbins-Larrivee tholicism, and larger families were marked differences in French communities, which emphasized tradition and antimaterialism. These values were at odds with the more individualist, capitalist leanings of English Canada.
    [Show full text]