Op-Ed Article
Quebec Should Go
The current Quebec election campaign is the
rerun of a film we have been watching, over and over, since we were
children.
 The Parti Quebecois promises a referendum on
sovereignty if elected, and the Liberals use this threat to pry more
concessions from the federal government. One or the other party wins
-- it doesn't matter which -- and the process recommences.
For this election the concession the Liberals are
demanding has to do with "fiscal imbalance," a newly
discovered federal injustice that Ottawa must correct now, or the
country could be lost. So it will probably be the Conservative
budget of March 19 that determines the Quebec election.
This small example points to some of the many ways
in which Quebec's political behaviour is harmful to the political
life of our country, and has been weakening Canada for a long time.
I'm not blaming Quebecers for this situation. They
have simply been acting in what they see as their own interests,
always peacefully and lawfully; the system works for them and I see
no reason why they would want to change a thing. But what they do is
harmful to Canada, and I believe that it's time for Canadians to
make some changes -- big ones.
I don't think it will be difficult to persuade you
that Quebec's political behaviour is harmful to Canada. Here are
just a few reminders:
| Quebecers
consistently elect most of their members to the Canadian
Parliament from the Bloc Quebecois, a party that has
separation as its primary objective and whose representatives
say openly that they have no interest in the welfare of any
other part of our country. The Bloc has been in existence now
for 16 years and it currently holds 50 of the 75 Quebec seats
in the Canadian Parliament. It is clearly the most authentic
voice of the Quebec people in Ottawa.
In Quebec itself, a separatist party, which
also rejects Canada, has been in power for 17 of the last 30
years. The Parti Quebecois is the only alternative to the
Liberals, and if the PQ doesn't win this election we can be
reasonably sure that it will win the next one.
It has been demonstrated over and over again
that francophone Quebecers, who make up 85 per cent of
Quebec's population, think of themselves as Quebecers -- not
as Canadians. Surveys indicate that one half of them feel no
attachment whatsoever to Canada. And 60 per cent of those who
do feel some attachment say it's only for the money,
"because of the economic benefits that Canada
provides."
Quebec's political leaders, unanimously, say
they will never accept and sign the Canadian Constitution
until Quebec is given a special status in it that no other
province could have.
Quebecers insist that they are a separate
"nation," a "distinct society" within
Canada, and so have a right to membership in international
organizations, separate from our Canadian representation; they
say Canadian delegates are incapable of representing Quebecers
in many international bodies.
In the rest of Canada serious efforts have
been made to increase the use of French. But in Quebec the
English language, which is, after all, the language of most
Canadians, has been progressively marginalized -- by language
laws -- and by the disappearance of nearly all anglophone
representation in the political life of the province.
Both of Quebec's main provincial political
parties constantly use the threat of separation to frighten
Canadians into providing them with benefits that other
provinces don't get. This is an established routine that works
very well for Quebec and creates a sense of unfairness in the
rest of the country. Dozens of efforts have been made by the
rest of Canada over the past three decades to try to satisfy
Quebec, without success. |
When all the factors are added up it's easy to
come to the conclusion that we are wasting our time with these
people. However, the difficult question is: What can we do about it?
For years we have been paralysed by fear in our
search for solutions. We are afraid that if we don't give Quebecers
what they want they will leave, and we have been told, over and over
again, that if they do leave it will be the end of Canada, that the
rest of the country will break up. In our current mindset we are
hostages, helpless. We are faced with the surreal situation in which
reasonable people believe that it's Quebec that is holding our
country together.
In a just-published update of my book, Time To Say
Goodbye: Building a Better Canada Without Quebec, I try to
demonstrate that this disaster scenario is not inevitable, that, if
Quebec leaves, Canada need not break up. The future of Canada does
not depend on Quebec. We can -- we will -- have a very fine country
here without them.
Once we understand that Canada without Quebec is a
viable option, many things become possible. We discover that we have
choices. We can do a sensible evaluation of the costs and benefits,
for Canada, of each new demand from Quebec. When Quebec makes its
next "or else" request for money or status we can ask,
"What's in it for Canada?" Yes, we can ask for concessions
from Quebec.
Furthermore, if the day comes when Quebecers do
hold a successful referendum -- and this could happen -- we will be
prepared for the next step, knowing we have a future together as
Canadians. Separation can be done peacefully and efficiently with a
positive objective in mind for both sides.
It is not going to be easy to get ourselves
believing in a Canada of nine provinces and three territories. We
are carrying a lot of baggage. For 30 years we have been told about
our obligation to correct past injustices; about two founding
nations; about learning French for national unity; about the
fragility of francophone society; and above all about the impending
breakup of our country and the terrible things that might happen to
us.
The main purpose of my book is to unpack that
baggage and demonstrate that, without Quebec, we're still OK as
Canadians. As just one example, there will be no hole created,
separating Atlantic Canada from the rest of our country -- unless
you want to believe that British Columbia is a hole separating
Alaska from the rest of the United States. In fact there are no
political or geographic barriers of any kind in our way. Canada is a
state of mind; an understanding, a belief in our shared values, a
question of will.
Some people have asked me if, in writing Building
A Better Canada Without Quebec I'm speaking as a Canadian or as a
Quebecer. I'm speaking as a Canadian, my country is Canada, and for
me Quebec is a province of Canada. I feel uncomfortable being asked
to choose between Quebec and Canada -- I've personally spent many
years trying to find a way to reconcile the two. But if I am forced
to choose -- and I think it's now time that we should choose -- then
my first political loyalty is to Canada.
I have also been asked where I would live if
Quebec were to separate. I would continue to live in Quebec -- as a
Canadian citizen.
There is nothing unusual in this. I have two
daughters, Canadian citizens, who have been living for many years in
the United States and intend to remain there, which doesn't mean
they support George W. Bush. There's a lot more to life than
politics.
My home is in Quebec -- friends, familiar sights
and sounds are here. This is a nice place to live now, and I'm
confident that an independent Quebec would still be a nice place to
live.
Quebec has already left Canada. Its name still
appears on the door and it sends somebody around regularly to pick
up cheques. But Quebecers don't live here any more.
It's time for Canada to move on.
Reed Scowen, a former member of the Quebec
legislature and adviser to Robert Bourassa, has been involved
full-time in the Quebec-Canada struggle, in Quebec, for nearly 30
years. He is the author of Time To Say Goodbye: Building a Better
Canada Without Quebec. E-mail: scowen@citenet.net
(c) The Ottawa Citizen 2007
Top
of page
|
