Quebec's Status Within Canada example essay topic

'The place of Quebec in Canada is at the heart of the debate on constitutional reform but is not the only source of discontent within the Canadian federal system' Canadian politics has become an ever-changing whirlwind of diversity. What is certain is that since the 1960's 'Quiet Revolution' in Quebec, the synthesis of federalism with parliamentary government, and the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the three institutional pillars, have forged a battle between federal-provincial relations. Without doubt, Quebec has been at the heart of this debate leading the way into the constitutional change of 1982 with the inaugurating of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, other forces are at work in Canada, which are not based on the existence of: "familiar territorial and linguistic cleavages associated with federalism but from non-territorial sources based upon gender and ethnicity". Therefore, the 'constitutional odyssey' as Russell states, cannot associate itself with Quebec as the only or main protagonists of constitutional reform. They must be placed in a broader consensus, which includes the rights of women, multicultural groups and Aboriginal peoples.

Ironically, Canada appears to be a country on the edge political separation. It has however, been in relative harmony since the rebellions in 1837. The recommendations of Lord Durham leading to the British North America Act of 1867 have seen the Canadian constitution come under little if no threat for some 120 years. This has somewhat changed in recent times. Quebec has become a province that views itself as 'nationality-based unit', becoming Franco-phone Canadians rather than just Canadians. This has developed the principle element to the argument of the Qu " eb'ecois, for they see themselves separate from Canada on the basis that their mother tongue is French-Canadian; they debate stems from this one issue of linguistics.

Language politics really took off during the period of the 'Quiet Revolution' in the 1960's. It was the principle as Alain-G. Gagnon points to that: "in 1961, Francophone Quebecer's were next to last worst-paid "ethnic" group in Quebec". This was coupled with major social change in Quebec with a move towards a secular state: "most important impact of secularization came with the 1964 transfer of control over education from the church to the Quebec Ministry of Education". This changing Quebec gave birth to a nationalist movement carrying the slogan "Ma^i tres chez nous", or "masters in our own house". This movement has furthered the argument by believing that the Qu " eb'ecois are not like any other province within the Confederation.

Being home to nearly 25 per cent of the national electorate with 82.8 per cent (1991 Census figures) speaking French-mother tongue you could arguably see why. It was at this point that the intentions of certain Qu " eb'ecois became clear. As they appear to be a 'distinct's society then they should be granted: "a unique constitutional status". By 1982, reform had become 'inescapable' and a concept of the relationship of Quebec and Canada had formed.

With the new Premier of Quebec, Ren'e L'evesque, heading the Parti Qu " eb'ecois, the fundamental assumption was embodied in the principle of a sovereignty-association. This is best epitomized by the assertion: "the term sovereignty-association binds together the goal of political independence (or sovereignty) for Quebec with both a recognition and acceptance of Quebec's economic integration with the rest of Canada". Gibbens follows this by adding that the idea it allows Quebec to enjoy the economic benefits without being reduced to a 'minority status'. However, the reform that prevailed from this political upheaval culminated into the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This Act's most astounding omission was that it failed to deal with any of the issues of Quebec's status in the 'national fabric'. Furthermore, Ren'e L'evesque had not signed for its approval, and Quebec National Assembly rejected it.

This Act was not for Quebec but became for the sovereignty of the people. Feminists saw entrenched rights that would see equality with all rights and freedoms: "guaranteed equally to male and female persons". Also the entrenchment of bilingualism in New Brunswick saw a further attempt by Ottawa to incorporate French and English into the federal language of the nation. This produced two sets of results that would play upon the downfall of the Meech Lake Accord. First, the Act had opened to allow all individuals and autonomous groups to be involved in politics, breaking down the wall of elitism, and acknowledging the rights of all minorities. The second consequence was that it's: "Silence implied that Quebec had no special role", in short proving that National Parliament could modify or amend the constitution without the acceptance of federal government, especially Quebec.

Evidence that whilst Quebec was at the heart of the debate they were not the only source of discontent. So came what has been coined by many the 'Quebec round'. It was Brian Mulroney's election victory in 1984 that changed the fortune of Quebec, as he promised to: "bring Quebec back into the constitution with honour". However, the conduct of the Meech Lake Accord in 1987, was to be its downfall. The Prime Minister and all 10 Premiers of Canada agreed unanimously on a set of five changes that Quebec had established as 'minimal conditions' for their support of the 1982 Act. The constitution had to establish and recognise Quebec as a 'distinct society', Quebec to have a veto over constitutional change, a constitutional guarantee that Quebec would receive three out of the nine appointments of judges in the Supreme Court of Canada, limitation on federal spending power, and finally the entrenchment of the previously informal sharing of the responsibility of immigration control.

These fundamental requirements came on the backlash of 1982, as there was "massive increase in support for sovereignty". However, this accord for the key change to the federal nature of Canadian politics was rejected. It would be too simply to imply as Gibbens notes that the reason for the Accords failure was due to: "miscues in New Brunswick, Manitoba, and Newfoundland". Though it can not be denied that this was practical downfall to the accord.

Its failure goes far deeper than this. It would be more likely that Russell denotes that its discarding was due to: The great majority of English-speaking Canadians simply did not accept that the 1982 Constitution was imposed on Quebec against its will. Nor did most of them believe that a failure to accommodate Quebec would lead to a breakup of the confederation. This reason explicitly allows us to understand that even by the rejection of Meech Lake in 1990, Canadians still failed to acknowledge Quebec as a distinct entity within her boarders. However, the breakdown again can be explained in other terms.

It was the nature of the consequence of 1982 that produced the downfall. This was because Canadians had: "been encouraged by the 1982 Charter to think of themselves as right-bearing-individuals and groups with recognised constitutional concerns". The concept of 'newer identities' as Burgess points to created a sense that constitutional change had to be on a frontier that would encompass all of the feelings of society not just the Qu " eb'ecois. The Accord being produced behind closed doors was evidently a mistake as it opposed the very principles of liberal-democracy. It led to a question over legitimacy, one that then led to the Accord being branded: " 'secretive, elitists, exclusive, hasty, unrepresentative and undemocratic'".

What this accumulated to be was that Quebec was still a province like the rest and: "Quebec's constitutional aspirations could no longer be addressed first or in isolation". What is so evident about this is that even when Quebec where to have their own interests solely discussed, the other sources of discontent within Canada were as important in the eventual outcome of change to federal system of Canada. Never again will this collaboration of just Canada and Quebec alone to produce an accord dealing with the Qu " eb'ecois, ever be produced. This became very evident when the next constitutional battle was to start; this is better known as the 'Canada round'. The result was that the Qu " eb'ecois and Aboriginal peoples of Canada: "would demand another round of constitutional change whether the Rest of Canada liked it or not".

However, as Russell notes for the Anglo-phones the debate would be more than just the agenda of Quebec and Aboriginal people, but would include the aspirations of 'outer Canada' and the role of Senate would be at the forehead, moving away from the nature of just the federal relations with national. By 1991 a 'glossy blue book' entitled Shaping Canada's Future Together was produced expressing the desires of Senate reformers, social democrats, feminists and environmentalists. In all it was a package that included: "Something for everyone". It included proposals such as Canada clause defining who people were (including acknowledgement of Quebec as a 'distinct society') and the entrenched right of Aboriginal self-government. However, as Russell and Gibbens write, when this became the Charlottetown Accord of 1992, it was in a diluted form. It was for this very reason that the Charlottetown Accord was to fail like the Meech Lake had.

Too many competing forces of discontent within the federal system were competing with each other causing the whole Accord to become a compromise as Gibbens writes: "Too many competing demands hatched too many compromises and the final product appeared to satisfy no one". Even the issue of 'Gender Equality' and the principles over election Aboriginal male chiefs, was left 'To be determined'. On October 26, 1992, the Accord went down to national defeat with 54.3 per cent voting 'no'. What clearly became evident after Meech Lake and Charlottetown was that, not only could constitutional change be exclusive of certain political minorities but neither could it be inclusive of all political minorities. The outcome of both Accords left Canada even more uncertain to its sovereign future than before.

Mulroney's dream of reintegrating Quebec back into Canada with: "honour and enthusiasm", was all but lost, and Quebec felt more alienated by not only Ottawa but by all cleavages within the federal structure of Canada. What is apparent from Charlottetown was that Quebec's status within Canada was at the heart of all debates over the constitution but was rivalled for supremacy by all those issue groups around them. Making Canada's constitutional debacle, a sovereignty issue for all citizens who place themselves under the broad banner of being Canadian.