|
Rene Levesque, the Premier of Quebec in 1976-1985
|
A study into the francophone-anglophone character of Canada.
In the following we in group 2 would like to present to you the different problems regarding the francophone-anglophone character of Canada. With help from texts in the book “Canada Profile” we will among other things be discussing why Quebec would want to become independent, the geographical and political consequences if Quebec left the federation and we will also be discussing whether or not Quebec still have thoughts of becoming independent?
Why did Quebec want to become independent?
Separatism / sovereignty / independence
Quebec sovereignty movement
About Canada it is said that the official languages are English and French. But only 18 % of the Canadians are French-speaking!
The efforts to brake the invasion of the Protestant Englishmen about 1760 is one of the main reasons of the religious and nationalistic background, to why the province Quebec historically has maintained the Catholic religion and the French language in North America. But first of all it represents the cultural identity of the French-speaking people in Canada.
Quebec was founded in 1608 as the French colonization slowly moved in. Not until later on, in the 17th century, the British colonization started to move in, but at a rapid pace. This is mainly the basis for the French/English conflict, because then a war between them began and it led to the fall of Quebec in 1759. This war lasted for many years until they agreed in a peace agreement in 1763, where the French crown gave up all rights for Quebec. In return the French-speaking population could keep their language and their Catholic religion.
In spite of these promises the French rapidly became inferior to the British. This was both in an economical and in a numeric way. The capital was mainly concentrated on British hands. And furthermore, a feudal agriculture and a very strict and conservative Catholic church resulted in a reduced population in Quebec.
The distinction between the languages lead to discrimination between the upper and the lower class. The owners of the capital were English-speaking and the workers were French-speaking.
In 1837 the French people rebelled against the British government for the first time, because they were dissatisfied with the discrimination of the French-speaking population. They were supported by the poor societies from the northern areas, but the rebellion was brutally knocked out and the social and political discontent continued.
But why would Quebec want to become independent? And what does the French-speaking population consider as sovereignty?
The party:
The Parti Québécois defines sovereign independence as the power for a state to take care of all its taxes, maintaining all its laws and sign all treaties.
The associations:
Certain associations that work for an independent Quebec fairly agree that the people of Quebec want to implement their rights to self-determination according to democratically give themselves their first independent constitutional state of law. They believe that Quebec, with sovereignty, would be in a better state to foster their own economy as well as the social and political development.
France:
France is generally expressing its sympathy to Quebec for cultural and historical reasons, but the country probably finds it very difficult when it comes to supporting Quebec’s nationalism because of the country’s own image as a very nationalistic country and because of the French ideas of “one nation”. And at the same time they are rejecting the same complex of problems about Corsica, Breton and Catala.
But why would Quebec want to become independent? Is it because of all the advantages they would get? Is it because of thoughts of a better economy? Is it the constitutional power? Is it because of better possibilities for developing own laws and so on? Or is it the idea that an independent Quebec, based on the ideas proposed by its proponents, is one historical and sociological nation of one people? Do they still bear the Englishmen a grudge and therefore want a rehabilitation, which would satisfy Quebec’s historical demands?
For most of the Quebec, whether nationalist or not, the problematic of Quebec’s political status is considered unresolved.
Experience, based on my additional knowledge from my trip to Canada, about the francophone-anglophone character of Canada:
The francophone part of the Canadian population in British Columbia isn’t specifically visible, because nothing in the province points to anything French. For example the Canadian television, which is mainly influenced by English and American tendencies. Out of 60 channels on an ordinary Canadian television, there were only a couple of French-speaking channels. The few things which particular are typically French are very simulated and seems almost as an annoyance to the rest of – the English-speaking part of – Canada (general opinion from quite accidental chosen people in British Columbia!).
The consequences for Quebec, and for Canada, if Quebec left the federation
Historical consequences:
As most people know the French and English parts of Canada have a very close historical connection.
Even though there is much diversity between the two parts they have had a kind of a pact between them, so if Quebec decided to leave the federation it would mean a serious break of the bond they had, connecting them.
Geographical consequences:
From a geographical point of view Quebec would be a very isolated community if they decided not to be a part of Canada anymore.
Not only would Quebec be the only officially French-speaking country in the middle of two huge English-speaking countries (USA and Canada), but it would also split eastern and western Canada. This would also isolate the island provinces near the coast of Quebec’s most eastern part for example Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Islands.
Another problem for Canada could be the capital of Canada, Ottawa. Ottawa lies in the middle of two provinces, Quebec and Ontario, which are respectively French- and English- speaking.
If Quebec chose to leave the federation it would lead to a huge conflict not only between the two provinces but also between Quebec and the rest of Canada. Who should claim Ottawa as theirs? Should it be parted equally or should one of the two provinces get the entire city?
And which cities should Quebec and Canada have as capitals. Should and could they share Ottawa as their capital? Or should they both be spending time and money on creating a new capital for both the countries?
Political consequences:
If Quebec left the Union, it would raise a lot of questions, because the country Quebec pretty much would have to start from scratch.
First of all they have no government. Yes, they do have a provincial capital, but would that, as said before, be used as the country’s capital? Or would they build a parliament in a whole different city?
Another issue for Quebec would be which type of government to chose. Should they get inspiration from the old Canadian system or should they get inspiration from the French system or another one?
They would also have to make a lot of decisions regarding politicians and elections. How many people should the government consist of? Should they have a president? How often should there be elections? And should they form their own new constitution?
For Canada it would probably not have the largest consequences. They would miss some politicians from Quebec, but as a whole the country would still be politically intact.
Economical consequences:
We believe that if Quebec chose to become independent, it would mean a change in economy for both Canada and Quebec. For example could the two “new” countries start trading with each other and therefore would their economy improve. On the other hand you could imagine that Quebec would have a reduced relationship with England, and perhaps even USA, because they left the Commonwealth. This would perhaps result in reduced import/export possibilities for Quebec.
If Quebec left the federation it would mean a loss of some big cities for the rest of Canada. In Quebec lies for example Montreal, which is a city that takes in many immigrants from Europe. So if Quebec left the federation the loss of Montreal and its immigrants would mean a huge loss of money for the English-speaking Canada.
In Canada each province has some particular resources that they can make a profit on. For example British Columbia has the forest industry and Quebec has many natural resources, such as energy, forestry, mineral resources. So if Quebec became independent, the rest of Canada would then have to buy and import these resources. This could perhaps result in a reduced economy for Canada, but on the other hand it would be an improvement in economy for Quebec.
Social consequences:
As said in the text ”Quebec and Alberta: The State of the East and the Empire of the West” by Peter Desbarats it would be easy for Quebec to loose its identity. Quebec has, like the rest of Canada, become more and more americanized, both in ways of their living standards and their general identity. So in some way you could say that Quebec was becoming more and more like the rest of Canada. In becoming so they would perhaps not have a large part left that actually was French. It would therefore be a positive consequence for Quebec if they left the federation. Then they would keep their identity, language, traditions and so on.
Quebec would be very isolated on the social front if it were to be independent. The people we have been talking to from British Columbia have said that they would not feel like going to Quebec if the province became independent. They felt they would no longer feel welcome there. Some even felt that they did not feel welcome today in Quebec. If you are not able to speak French in Quebec it is hard to manage in the province. For example most of the signs are only in French. In British Columbia all signs of all kind are in both English and French to accommodate both the francophone and the anglophone communities.
The students we asked at the University of British Columbia (UBC) have strong opinions that if Quebec left the federation it would start a chain reaction of discrimination between the people from Quebec and the people from the rest of Canada.
How is the situation today?
During the 1960’s there was a certain feeling amongst the common population, that perhaps the thought of an independent Quebec would be a good idea. This was underlined in 1968 when Rene Levesque founded a party called the Parti Québécois. He and the party suggested that Quebec should become an independent political sovereignty. But despite of the province’s independence, he suggested, there should still be an economic tie with the rest of the provinces of Canada. The idea, however, was abandoned, because there was not enough support to the party in 1985.
Still, his ideas of independence are shown in the text “Separation Two” by Richard Rohmer. In this text Richard Rohmer pictures a conversation between three high political figures: The Premier of Quebec, the English Deputy Prime Minister and the Prime Minister of Canada. Quebec is ready to leave the Canadian federation and they are now discussing why. The Prime Minister of Quebec believes that Quebec has been e.g. culturally and economically oppressed by the English-speaking part of Canada. Meanwhile, the English Deputy Prime Minister believes that if Quebec left the federation, it would be a disaster for both Canada and Quebec, because they are one nation and they should stay one nation.
In the text “Quebec and Alberta: The State of the East and the Empire of the West” Peter Desbarats says, that people in Quebec believed that a separation from the rest of Canada would be inevitable. Even though the English-speaking Canada and Quebec looked more and more alike in certain ways, they were starting to differ in a political way. And therefore Quebec’s attitude towards the rest of Canada changed. The two parts of Canada became two different worlds.
When we interviewed the students at UBC, we got the impression that there was a certain amount of hostility towards the English-speaking people when visiting Quebec. But one pointed out that if you were able to speak French it was not that big a problem.
Today we have learnt that the idea of separation has settled down. We believe that the issue is no longer a problem in Quebec. Today Canada has accepted their multicultural background as well as their bilingualism.
We have learnt that for many people in British Columbia, it is important to understand the French part of Canada as well as the English. For example French Immersion classes are very popular. French is also chosen by many at the High School level instead of Spanish. This should be viewed as a positive attitude towards French Canada. Maybe it is a sign that something as language should not part a country.
Does the US have a similar situation?
Would it mean the same to the US if a part of it became independent as it would to Canada?
Both Canada and the US have a lot of things in common. They are both relatively “new countries” and were first founded as states during the last couple of centuries, after the Europeans arrived. This means that they have had the same problems with native people and other issues related to the arrival of the Europeans. Another thing both countries have in common is the big mix of people and cultures from all over the world and today we see a state built on values from Europe, Southern Asia and Africa. The internal structure of the two nations is also very much alike. The nations are divided into a number of provinces, which have their own governments and capitals. These governments decide most of the things within their part of the nation, which leads to the question, are Canada and the US nations or just a lot of small states cooperating?
Even though Canada and the US have some things in common, they also have differences. The biggest difference is that the Canadian population is divided into two parts: An English- and a French-speaking part, where the US is completely English speaking. This means that Canada has a natural contrast between those two parts which you don’t see in the US. The “identity” of the countries is another contrast between them. US is built upon the idea that everyone is more or less free to do whatever they want and every person is responsible for his/her own fortune. This means that both the “normal” citizen and the provincial government have some rights, which you do not see in Europe. An example of this is the law in the US that allows American citizens to carry firearms without licence. Canada is in contrast to the American idea, or rather dream, built as a community with room for everyone and where you are allowed to settle with your own culture. This creates the big mix of cultures which I mentioned in the first part.
Back to the main question – Would it be the same if e.g. Quebec became independent as if a state in the US became independent?
In Canada you see this natural separation between the smaller French part and the English part, but at the same time these two parts are a symbol of the Canadian identity, where different cultures live among each other. If Quebec became independent, it would kind of break the whole idea of the Canadian identity. In the US, they have the idea of everyone being free to do whatever they want to. If a part became independent it would of course affect the economy and a lot of other things but it wouldn’t break with the identity, that everyone is free.
Although it would have a smaller effect on the US if a state became independent, it is much more likely that Canada will be divided. The US is, partly because of the Civil War between the North States and South, more closely bound together than Canada. Another argument, that Canada is more likely to split than the US, is the dual language in Canada, where the French part of the population is a lot smaller than the English part and it is also under the English crown. As said before, there are a lot of reasons why the French part of Canada would like to be an independent state.
Conclusion:
It would probably mean more to Canada than to the US, if the nation was divided, although it is more likely to happen in Canada.
|
