QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001 GOVERNMENT OF the negotiation of this partnership, JACQUES PARIZEAU subject to a decision otherwise by the (SEPTEMBER 26, 1994 TO JANUARY 29, 1996) Québec National Assembly. The Bill authorized the National As- sembly to proclaim the sovereignty of Québec once it would have approved the partnership treaty or, upon obtain- ing notification from the orientation e nationale é and supervision committee for nego- tiations, once it would have realized that such negotiations would lead nowhere. The offer to Canada of an economic and political partnership was to be ric Parizeau based upon the three-party agree- Source: Collection Assembl É ment of June 12, 1995 between three ••• Status of Québec political parties: the Parti québécois, 352.Québec’s project for accession to sover- the Bloc québécois and the Action eignty along with an offer for a new démocratique du Québec. This agree- economic and political partnership ment involved the proposing of a with Canada.373 treaty to Canada that would have provided appropriate measures for The government of Jacques Parizeau maintaining and improving the exist- was elected on a platform of holding a ing economic space, establishing rules referendum on the accession of Québec for the division of federal assets and to sovereignty. On December 6, 1994, management of the common debt, the government unveiled a draft bill creating joint political institutions on the sovereignty of Québec that was required to administer the economic submitted to the general consultation and political partnership. of all Québec regions via the commis- sions on the future of Québec. The three-party agreement stated the priority sectors where a treaty would Following the report of the National have to ensure that the partnership has Commission on the future of Québec, the authority to act: customs union, free the government made public Bill 1 movement of goods, free movement of entitled An Act respecting the future individuals, free movement of services, of Québec (hereafter, the Bill) that free movement of capital, monetary was submitted to a referendum on policy, labour mobility and citizenship. October 30, 1995. The Agreement also evoked the pos- The Bill provided that Québec’s acces- sibility—with some examples—that sion to sovereignty be preceded by a members would be free to make formal offer of economic and political agreements in other areas of common partnership with Canada. A one-year interest. Lastly, the offer was to include maximum deadline was provided for the creation by treaty of joint political 373. This paragraph presents a synthesis of the government project (See the bill and the three-party agreement forming the basis of this project in part 3: document no. 30). See also the address to the nation delivered by Jacques Parizeau on October 1, 1995 reproduced in part 2 of this document. 88 QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001 institutions needed for administering Agreement sounded Canada’s refusal the partnership, specifically the creation in recognizing—albeit symbolically— of a council, a secretariat, an assembly our difference. As of today, the basic and a tribunal for resolving disputes. law of Canada does not recognize Québec as a nation, a people or even As regards Québec’s accession to as a distinct society. A sad state of sovereignty, the Bill provided constitu- affairs. [...] tional provisions, especially regarding the drafting of a new Québec consti- Three years ago, united as never tution by a constituent commission to before in the Bélanger-Campeau com- be ultimately submitted to the people mission on the future of Québec, feder- of Québec for approval by referendum. alists and sovereigntists agreed on a The Bill lays down various constitu- common strategy and speaking as one, tional provisions, among other things, they rejected the present Canadian guarantees regarding the rights of the regime. Federalist members of the English-Speaking Community and the Commission wanted to give Canada one aboriginal nations. last chance for an in-depth renewal, failing which full sovereignty for Québec The Bill included other information deal- would then be proposed to Québecers ing with the various terms of Québec’s in a referendum. accession to sovereignty: territorial in- tegrity, citizenship, legal tender currency, The scenario played itself out inexora- treaties, international organizations bly. Two years ago, the Charlottetown and alliances. Lastly, it stipulated accord was submitted to the electorate transitional provisions. On October 30, and was beaten, both in Québec and in 1995, the No option carried the day Canada. [...] That was to be Canada’s with a result of 50.58 % and the Yes last chance. [...] option obtained 49.42 %.374 The more time goes by, the more the 353.Jean Lesage called on us to be “Masters Canadian majority is determined to in our own Home,” Daniel Johnson act as though there is but one nation Sr. wanted “Equality or independence,” in Canada, as though all provinces Robert Bourassa proposed the “Distinct are equal. [...] With the passing of Society.” One after another, our at- time, decisions we wish to make as tempts to expand or just to preserve Quebecers will increasingly be blended Québec’s autonomy within Canada into the great Canadian rush for unifor- have run into increasingly firm rebut- mity. This is the Canada of tomorrow. tals from our neighbours. Do we want to be a part of it? Twelve years ago, Pierre Trudeau’s [...] unilateral patriation dwindled the [There must be] something. That some- National Assembly’s powers against thing is sovereignty! But sovereignty our will, with a Constitution that that belongs to Quebecers from all Québec has never signed. Four years regions, all social, linguistic, cultural ago, the death of the Meech Lake and political origins.375 374. See Directeur général des élections du Québec, Référendum 1995. Rapport des résultats officiels du scrutins, 1995, p. 49 (an extract from this Official Report and the resolution of the Québec National Assembly on the referendum question are reproduced in part 3: document no. 31). 375. Message by the Prime Minister Jacques Parizeau at the time of the publication of the draft bill on sovereignty and the announcement of the commissions on the future of Québec, December 6, 1994, p. 3-4. 89 QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001 ••• Constitutional reform process the following ministerial statement on manpower adjustment and voca- The impossible in-depth reform of Canadian federalism: See paragraph 364. tional training: • Québec must have sole responsi- ••• Distribution of powers bility of the manpower adjustment a) Sectorial jurisdictions and vocational training policies within its territory and, consequent- 354.In the field of health care, not only ly, must repatriate the moneys that has Ottawa stepped into a sector of the Federal Government allocates exclusive provincial jurisdiction, but to Québec for these programmes; each of its initiatives goes against the will of the provinces with frequent • In the current constitutional con- harmful consequences regarding these text, and in view of offering better provinces’ orientations. Québec beckons services to its clientèle, Québec the other provinces to put pressure must regain the control and the on the federal government so that it administration of the different ceases to encroach upon the health services pertaining to employment care sector. As for Québec, it intends and to manpower development and to fully assume its exclusive power and of all of the programmes that are responsibilities in this field, all the likely to be financed by the unem- while especially preserving its prerog- ployment insurance funds on the ative for defining what is “medically territory of Québec for this purpose, necessary” for the purposes of the and must accordingly receive the insured services. With regard to health sums that normally are attributed care services, the provinces do not have for taking over such responsibility; to ask Ottawa for any orientation what- soever; it is the provinces’ responsibility • The Government of Québec and the to offer their respective citizenries the representatives of the employers, the health services that they are entitled unions and the cooperative sector to expect. It therefore becomes obvious intend to oppose any initiative on that the federal government must the part of the Federal Government withdraw from this sector into which that would constitute interference it is contributing less and less, and in Québec’s fields of jurisdiction. where its actions do not in any way And that, consequently, it request improve accessibility to Canada’s health that the Government of Québec and care services.376 the Minister of Employment immedi- The Financing of Health Care and Social Programs: ately commence formal discussions with See also paragraphs 362, 365 and 366. the Federal Government in order to 355.That the National Assembly reaffirm ensure that this consensus and the the consensus voiced […] on 13 De- promotion of the interests of the cember 1990 and communicated in population of Québec are respected.377 376. Communiqué from the staff of Jean Rochon, Minister of Health and Social Services, Interprovincial Conference of Health Ministers, Vancouver, April 11, 1995. 377. Unanimous resolution of the Québec National Assembly dated December 4, 1995 (quotation). 90 QUÉ BEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ISSUES FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001 356.Considering the failure of federal admin- capacities and that Québec’s areas of istration over ground fish harvesting, jurisdiction are respected in agree- Québec demands the administration of ments between the federal government fisheries. The transferring of respon- and municipalities. The government of sibility proposed by Québec cannot be Québec neither can nor does it want to carried out within the framework of a take the federal government’s place in federal withdrawal aimed at reducing the role of financial support that the its operating costs.