What political consequences would have occurred if Quebec had voted "Yes" in the 1995 referendum?
Introduction
This discussion tackles the Quebec 1995 referendum, more especially regarding what would have been the consequence of a Yes Vote during the referendum. This topic is important, considering that it focuses on as issue of high political ramification, which has also found subsequent applications worldwide, with several other sections of different countries holding referendums to seek for a right to govern themselves as sovereign states. The significance of this topic rests in the fact that the Quebec 1995 referendum had a long political history which did not have an implication on Canada alone, but high potential implications on France, Britain and the USA, since a Yes Vote would have influenced the relationship amongst these countries .
The Quebec referendum that was held in 1995 was a second round of vote that was meant to give the residents of the Quebec province in Canada the chance to determine whether they wanted to secede from Canada and thus establish Quebec as a sovereign state. Quebec has had a long history of wanting to secede from Canada, considering that it is the Canadian providence that is predominantly inhabited by the French-speaking people, whose political relationship with the rest of the Canadian provinces, mostly inhabited by the English-speaking people has been characterized by conflicting ideologies . Thus, the 1995 referendum was not the first political attempt to have Quebec gain its own independence. The discussion holds that the Quebec 1995 referendum would have had both positive and negative implications. Therefore, this discussion seeks to analyze the political consequences that would have f...
... middle of paper ...
...s-in-quebec-prosperity-report/
6. Robin Philpot. Quebec’s 1995 referendum. (Montreal: The Untouchables, 2005)
7. Scott Reid. The Borders of an Independent Quebec: A Thought Experiment. (Good Society, 1997).
8. Trevor Calpine. The Partition Principle: Remapping Quebec after Separation (Toronto: ECW Press, 1996)
9. The Canadian Press. U.S. wouldn't have recognized Quebec independence in wake of Yes vote in 1995. (The Montreal News, March 14, 2014) Retrieved March 26, 2014 from http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/u-s-wouldn-t-have-recognized-quebec-independence-in-wake-of-yes-vote-in-1995-1.1730253
10. Panetta, Alexander. 1995 Quebec Referendum: U.S. Would Have Delayed Response If Province Voted Yes, Docs Reveal (The Canadian Press March 14, 2014). Retrieved March 26, 2014 from http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/03/14/1995-quebec-referendum-bill-clinton_n_4965922.html
The Meech Lake accord was a set of constitutional amendments that were designed to persuade Quebec Province to accept the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 (Brooks 152). This accord derives its name from the Meech Lake, where these negotiations were held by Mulroney Brian, the Canadian Prime Minister, and the ten premiers of the ten Canadian Provinces (Brooks 211). By the time the Canadian constitution was being implemented, Quebec was the only province that had not consented to it. Somehow, the partition of the constitution in 1982 was carried out without Quebec’s agreement, but it was still bound by the same law. Attempts were made to persuade this province to sign the constitution, which it agreed to do but only after its five demands are fulfilled by the Canadian government. Unfortunately, these demands were not met and this accord failed in 1990, when two provincial premiers failed to approve it. This paper answers the question whether Quebec asked for too much during the Meech Lake Accord negotiations.
As its own state Quebec would have the capacity to act, consolidate and further create their own cultural identity (Heard, 2013). For example, Quebec could foster the national language to be French. By gaining independence from Canada, Quebec can then create their own laws, own immigration rules and levy taxes (Heard, 2013). This would allow Quebec to be completely independent from the rest of Canada, but they would have connecting boarders like the United States and Canada do.
The years following the Second World War were bleak in regards to Canada's future as a country, with the public and politicians alike set against each other, but soon a Québec man by the name of René Lévesque entered journalism, and then politics, voicing his views for all to hear, with great success and vigour. Though obstacles presented themselves often in his life, he changed the views of Québec, Canada and the world as a whole. René Lévesque was a passionate and charismatic politician who greatly contributed to post-war Québec and even today through his beliefs in separatism, founding the Parti Québecois and passing Bill 101.
...ereignty. As mentioned Quebec does not have complete sovereignty and it shares its powers with the federal government (Johnson). Strong words like Johnson's found in the mass media are very significant to issues such as this. As elected representatives the government will not act against the wishes of the majority of citizens. Therefore if the Canadian citizens claim that Native Sovereignty in Canada can not coexist with Canadian sovereignty than it will not.
A century ago, Canada was under control by the British Empire. The battles we fought the treaties we signed and the disputes we solved all helped us gain independence from our mother country “Britain”. Canadians fought a long battle protecting others, and from these battles we gained our peaceful reputation and our independence from Britain. Canada became a nation on July, 1st 1867. Although we were an independent country, our affairs and treaties were all still signed by Britain. In the next years Canada would establish its own government, and lead its own affairs. Many important events led to Canada’s independence, one of the earliest signals that Canada wanted to establish autonomy was the Chanak affair of 1921. In addition the battle of Normandy, which occurred on June 6 1944, contributed to the autonomy of Canada. The Suez Canal Crisis, which took place in the year 1956, earned Canada a place in the media spotlight, displaying Canada as a peaceful country that deserves the right to be independent. One of the final steps that aided with Canada’s independence from Britain was the Canada Act of 1982. Independence from Britain steadily increased throughout the 20th century because of political decisions made in Canada.
CBC-Digital. "CBC Digital Archives - Separation Anxiety: The 1995 Quebec Referendum - Separation Anxiety: The 1995 Quebec Referendum." CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 06 Mar. 2014. Web. 02 Apr. 2014
Many Francophones believed that they were being discriminated and treated unfairly due to the British North American Act which failed to recognize the unique nature of the province in its list of provisions. Trudeau, with the aid of several colleagues, fought the imminent wave of social chaos in Quebec with anti-clerical and communist visions he obtained while in his adolescent years. However, as the nationalist movement gained momentum against the Provincial government, Trudeau came to the startling realization that Provincial autonomy would not solidify Quebec's future in the country (he believed that separatism would soon follow) and unless Duplessis could successfully negotiate (on the issue of a constitution) with the rest of Canada, the prospect of self-sovereignty for Quebec would transpire. His first essay (Quebec and the Constitutional Problem) explores
The Trans Canada Highway became a visible nationalistic figure that set apart Canada from other countries. The highway was built to reinforce a newfound nationalism, however, there were oppositions in the building of the highway. In order for the highway to run from coast to coast, every province had to sign and agree to an Act that was enforced by the federal government. Every province agreed to the Act and the implementation of the highway except for Quebec, who at the time was governed under Premier Maurice Duplessis. Duplessis opposed the idea of the highway because under the Trans Canada Highway Act, the federal government would have complete control over road regulations when previously it was the responsibility of the provincial and municipal governments. This created a problem for the highway as the road needed to go through Quebec in order for it to be able to include the east coast provinces. The Quebec premier was challenging the unity and nationalism that the “new” Canada wanted to have. It wasn't until Duplessis passed away and a Liberal government c...
Canada: The Quiet Revolution in Quebec The English-French relations have not always been easy. Each is always arguing and accusing the other of wrong doings. All this hatred and differences started in the past, and this Quiet revolution, right after a new Liberal government led by Jean Lesage came in 1960. Thus was the beginning of the Quiet Revolution.
To decide what to do after Quebec separates, First Ministers and the ROC, must first look at why it happened. Perhaps Quebec's profound nationalism and unique national identity conflicted with citizens in the ROC; in order to gain understanding of their decision the ROC must look at Quebec's past. Quebec was not always treated fairly nor where they given many rights in regards t...
Patriquin, M. (2014, April 11). The epic collapse of Quebec separatism. Retrieved May 15, 2014, from Maclean’s website: http://www.macleans.ca/politics/the-epic-collapse-of-separatism/
This paper will prove how regionalism is a prominent feature of Canadian life, and affects the legislative institutions, especially the Senate, electoral system, and party system as well as the agendas of the political parties the most. This paper will examine the influence of regionalism on Canada’s legislative institutions and agendas of political part...
The fear of the PQ is that if several of the floating voters out there feel that a sovereign Quebec must mean a partitioned, patchwork Quebec, the separatists might well fall back to 40% if that happens. One group of Quebeckers with the strongest-and geographically the widest claims for self determination, the Cree, Inuit, and Innu who occupy the resource-rich northern two-thirds of the province. The views of these nations, oddly enough, seem to go unmentioned. During the 1995 attempt to secede, these three groups all voted by more than 95% to stick with Canada. People outside of Canada are baffled at how Canada ended up in such a state of affairs.
Many people across the globe argue that nationalism within Canada is simply not feasible. It is said that we as a people, differ so greatly with our diverse cultures, religions, and backgrounds that we cannot come together and exist together as a strong, united nation. In his book, Lament for a Nation, George Grant tells the reader that “…as Canadians we attempted a ridiculous task in trying to build a conservative nation in the age of progress, on a continent we share with the most dynamic nation on earth. The current history is against us.” (1965) Originally directed towards the Bomarc Missile Crisis, the book argues that whatever nationalism Canada had was destroyed by globalization as well as the powerful American sphere of influence. Although it is true that the book was initially written as a response to the events that took place in the late 1950s, many of the points are still valid today.
Canada is an example of a nation with the question of a country wide unification among all its citizens on the table since the time of confederation in 1867 and even a few years prior. What some these factors that make Canada different from areas around it? How can a country that dominates such large land mass and that bares such vast cultural differences, be united? Can Canadians ever come to agreement upon the values they hold to be important? The debates of these questions continue to plague Canadian parliaments, especially when examining the differences between Canada and the province Quebec. Even though many argue and hope for Canada’s unity in the future, the differences in political socialization and culture present throughout the country creates a blurry vision of Canadian harmony and makes it extremely difficult to realistically vision Canadian unification. Is that, however, a bad thing?