The Quebec Problem in Canada
The recent victory by Quebec separatist groups to cancel the “Battle on the Plains of Abraham” re-enactment serves to heighten continuing frustrations to the rest of Canadians watching the continuing boomerang of the threat of an independent Quebec.
It is a well-known fact that 55-60% of French-speaking Quebecers would like to see an independent Quebec to call their own country. Because of Canada’s leniency towards Quebec, they are more than half-way there. Anyone who goes to Quebec city and asks for directions to the provincial legislature will cause confusion. “Provincial legislature? Oh, you mean the National Assembly!” On another occasion, while visiting the huge and majestic St. Joseph’s Oratory, I noticed that the guestbook being signed by Quebecers was listing Quebec as their country. Quebec nationalism which runs through all the political parties in Quebec (even the supposed federalist ones) has been left unchecked by Canadian Federalism. The only thread that holds Canada together is the English and immigrant populations that for now seem to have staunchly been in favour of Federalism.
It seems apparent that the itch seems to intensify and has become so red that the rest of Canada is starting to want to scratch it as well. I would propose giving them a limited scratch and here is how it would work. The Quebec-Ontario border right up to the Gaspe tip should form the new Quebec country. The northern border would not go any further than Jonquiere. The rest of the province would revert back to Canada until its inhabitants can confirm that it wishes to stay or leave. The Natives and the Inuits have long expressed their desire to remain in Canada should Quebec separate. Quebec’s provincial borders are protected by the Canadian constitution. However, secession would mean that the Constitution no longer is valid to Quebec therefore there is no legal justification that those borders can be retained by Quebec. One cannot opt out of Confederation and expect that the Constitution to defend Quebec’s territory. A transfer committee would be set up to deal with the transfer of powers and negotiations would have be ongoing to determine how much money would have to be paid back to Canada. Quebec would have its full taxation powers over its new domain. It would raise its own army, create its own passports, currency and have its own set of diplomats.
This seems a bit far fetched now but eventually a separatist government will be re-elected in Quebec and another referendum will be on the horizon. There is also another flip side of the coin whereby the rest of Canada might want a referendum to decide whether it wants a restless Quebec in its fold. Still, another resolve to the problem would for Quebec to sign the Constitution. Premier Charest would have the opportunity to lock Quebec in and forever put an end to the question of Quebec independence. However, he would be branded as a traitor even worse than Pierre Trudeau. This is a very unlikely scenario because he probably would have done it by now as he has been in power for almost six years.
In conclusion, we have a choice to go on with the current purgatory in which Quebec demands more and continuously bemoans its lack of independence or we scratch the itch and hope that those separatists actually realize how great things are in the Canadian confederation.
Related posts:
- By-elections, Gilles Duceppe & the Bloc Québécois’ Losing Hold on Quebec As a Tory, I have to admit that I’m reveling...
- The Feudal Times – Politics in Quebec I’m confused. After years of experiencing the slow, muddling governments...
- Quebec Votes 2008 – Quebec Provincial Election Breakdown of the Issues The Issues Separation Health Education Economy Language Immigration Separation...
- Quebec Votes – 2008 Who are you going to vote for? Here is a...
- Canada’s Democracy to Destruction: The Right To Secede Imagine small communities in Canada’s northern wilderness making unanimous and...
Loading ...
February 22nd, 2009 at 2:32 pm
“hope those separatists actually realize how great things are in the Canadian confederation” – Come on!
“The only thread that holds Canada together is the English and immigrant populations that for now seem to have staunchly been in favour of Federalism.” – False, my grandfather being a fervent federalist whose son died for the Canadian Army he would slap you in the face.
-=-=
Your text is even disrespectful to Quebec’s federalists, you don’t have a single clue of Quebec’s specificity; it shows. Your political vision lacks the simplest consideration / knowledge of the social reality of being dominated by the english culture.
The dominant Quebecers’ discourse should be different by now, knowing that we live in a globalizing world were the english language is an asset (mandarin being the next). Still, one can’t understand how it’s like to live a neglected culture as part as a “unified” whole (Canada – “d’un océan à l’autre”).
I hope for the end of both solitudes, but to be quite frank I think that most of the work has to be done in the West.
If you want to discuss this you’ve got my e-mail, Robert.
oh and about that: “The recent victory by Quebec separatist groups to cancel the “Battle on the Plains of Abraham” re-enactment serves to heighten continuing frustrations to the rest of Canadians watching the continuing boomerang of the threat of an independent Quebec.”
This has nothing to do with separatism, everybody was frustrated with it (Sovereignists being the loudests) : You guys want to humiliate us one more? Abraham’s plains were the last nail in the coffin of french canadian, this is the moment where we lost and started to be assimilated. English Canada never managed to truly convince us that they wanted the best for us.
We need to re-open the constitution, this is what you guys are scared about… signing it in the middle of the night.
Don’t label me as a Separatist, I am not
– More of an Heterodoxist. Drop me a line.
February 23rd, 2009 at 8:48 am
Alexandre,
Je vous remercie pour votre note! Thank you for writing in and giving us a different perspective on the Quebec situation.
However, I stand by my comments based on statistics that the English and the Allophones (immigrant) vote is what contributed and topped the results in favour of staying within Canada. I never insinuated that there were no Francophone federalists…there are indeed. What I wished to clarify is that they are in the minority. 55-60% of french speaking Quebecers would prefer an independant Quebec. That would leave 40-45% of Francophones in favour of Canadian federalism. The fact that Quebec continuously sends the majority of its Federal votes to Ottawa with the Bloc only serves to prove my point more.
My text is most certainly “disrespectful” of Quebec federalists because of two reasons.
1) They constantly place democratic processes above the security of the Canadian union. They consistently endorse Quebec’s right to decide its future. How much can one really love Canada if they are consistently enabling Quebec separatist to attempt to destroy the country?
2) Their constant demands for more power within the confederation sometimes blurs their position with that of the sovereignist movement. At least with Quebec sovereignists, we know where they stand. We can never be sure with the Quebec federals of how they react to certain issues. Robert Bourassa is as good as an example as any. In the failed Victoria charter of the Constitution of 1971, Trudeau gave Bourassa all of his demands to ratify the contitution and Bourassa had to reject it because he said it would never fly with the Quebec constituents. Two failed attempts at ammending the constitution saw Boursassa within a hair of endorsing separation by suggesting a “Suprastructure”.
Lastly, your comments on the Plains Of Abraham I suspect are a little naive. Most of the public does not realize that French went on to defeat the British in the next battle at Ste Foy. The British barely hung on and locked themselves in Quebec and their reinforcements happened to arrive before the British. Furthermore, the real reason that the French lost New France can be found in the Treaty Of Paris in 1763. In that treaty, France gave up New France in favour of Guadaloupe. It is the media and a false knowledge of the historical facts that have led many to falsely believe that British took over upon the result of this specific battle.
Your final remark alludes to the Night Of The Long Knives in which Levesque’s provincial allies deserted him and signed the Canadian constitution. The desertion was actually caused by Levesque himself when he forged a brief alliance with Trudeau. The gang of eight disintegrated at that point but of course history was revised and Levesque came out of it bitterly. Trudeau did not help matters by rubbing his victory in Levesque’s nose. Quebec came to that constitutional table with a sovereignist government…of course they were never going to sign. The real question is what will it take for Quebec to put its signature on the constitution…maybe that is something that Quebecers are scared of.
February 23rd, 2009 at 9:04 am
“The British barely hung on and locked themselves in Quebec and their reinforcements happened to arrive before the British.”
This should read “reinforcments happened to arrive before the French.”
March 15th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Dear Friends,
Please find attached here information about the consipiracy of Quebecois to deny democratic rights to
Anglocanadians by reducing their representation in the federal parliament hence allowing Quebecois
To keep their tight control on the federal parliament and thus excluding anglocanadians from the
Democratic process .Quebecois control everything even prime minister is taking orders from Quebecois
and here is the proof how instead of 21 federal seats,ontario will be given only 10 federal parliament seats.Is this not the dictatorship of Quebecois or what ?
Ontario has a lot more seats than Quebec, and a lot more winnable ones for the Conservatives than Quebec. But there’s a litmus test ahead for Mr. Harper. The redistribution of seats based on the last census ought to give Ontario another 21 seats, seven for British Columbia and five for Alberta.
The Harper government, afraid of a widening gap of seats between Ontario and Quebec, had introduced legislation giving Ontario just 10 more seats, instead of the 21. The Conservative platform spoke of moving “towards” accurate representation by population.
1.You can plan,declare and conspire to destroy unity and federal system of Canada but still can enjoy Privilages of being a member of Federal Parliament of Canada representing separatist Blk Quebecois
2. British conquered New France in 1759 and allowed french culture and language to flourish but Quebecois inspite being
Total parasites and suckers and a big liability on Canada Still banned English language and culture with enforcement by franco culture police.
3.French was enforced by Trudeau without national consenus or refrendum just to benefit Quebecois
And allow them to capture all the key federal jobs so they can get all the public taxed federal money for
Quebec .
4. Quebec acts only as a province of Canada just to get financial help and funding otherwise it is
A country with its own laws,constitution and even Immigration offices worldwide including New York.
5. Over one milliom anglo canadians in Quebec are denied english education for their children and other
Services but Superior race Quebecois get all the services in French and Ontario government funded
French education,medical services.All over Canada students have to pay huge amount of tution fees
But Quebec gets all the federal money to offer almost free higher education with very little fees
How long this injustice and dictatorship of Quebecois will continue ???
Regards,
Peter
January 25th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
Dear Robert,
Thank you for your article, which serves to underline the fundamental lack of understanding of Quebec’s psyche by anglo-canadians. The nature of this eternal dilemna between Canada and Quebec rests upon communication, whose bridge were irreparably fractured during the course of the 1995 referendum’s perpetual escalation of hostilities. As long as Canada will attempt to satisfy itself in half-truths, subjectively revised history and hastily generalized misconceptions of Quebec, the dialogue will remain effectively broken. As a lawyer interested in international and constitutional law, I urge you to reconsider in light of current legal principles the foundation of your argument for Quebec secession. You are misinformed on many counts, and the inadequacy of the foundation for your dissertation of the legal ramification for secession fatally wounds from the onset any sort of conclusion to which you might come. Although I understand the nature of blogging, I encourage you to further your research before addressing the Quebec situation again. Unwarranted and unfounded criticism only serves to fuel the fire, not quell it.
And to peter, I suggest you give a second shot to elementary school. It is not that difficult, and the english lessons should become a whole lot easier the second time around. Don’t attempt to force-feed me blindly idealistic anglophone bullcrap if you do not have the faintest idea of how to write the language intelligently.
A non-dogmatic, francophone resident of Quebec, open to debate and discussion,
Charles