Majority and Minority Rights -

Quebec

CLN4U – Mr. Andrez

Introduction

In a democracy, the majority rules. Canada also has laws which guarantee the

protection of minority rights. What happens when majority and minority

rights clash in Canadian society? Why is it essential to balance majority and

minority rights?

French- English Conflict

Francophone: in a bilingual country, a person whose principal language is French

Anglophone: in a bilingual country, a person whose principal language is English

By Confederation in 1867, the French were a minority in Canada, but there language was protected under s.93 of the Constitution

Relationship between Francophones in Quebec and Anglophone Canadians has not always been harmonious; many conflicts have arisen throughout time over the protection of the French culture and language

The French-English Conflict

The Quiet Revolution (1960-1966) The movement of Quebec’s social and political

influence from rural-religious to urban-secular. French speaking Quebecois began to resist the

English speaking economic and social dominance within Quebec, and began to assert their language and cultural rights through politics.

The Canadian government under Pierre Trudeau introduced “official bilingualism”, guaranteeing federal government services in both languages through the Official Languages Act, 1969.

Quebec’s Quiet Revolution, 1960-1966: Francophones wanted equal partnership

with English in Canada, but a partnership where Quebec would determine its own role and fate, thereby ensuring the survival of the French culture and language

The Separatist movement

Many Quebecois were frustrated by the federal system of government, and wanted more political control over their own society.

The desire for a politically independent Quebec gained support, but the degree of desired independence varied between full political independence (extreme) to a more integrated arrangement with the rest of Canada (moderate).

The more moderate arrangement gained the most popularity under Rene’ Levesque’s plan for “Sovereignty Association” .

Sovereignty-Association:

concept put forth by the Parti Quebecois government whereby Quebec would become a sovereign jurisdiction in all areas of law making, but would maintain economic association with the rest of Canada (common currency)

Exclusive power to make laws, levy taxes and establish foreign relations

Separatism During the 1960s Quebeckers increasingly

questioned their province’s role within confederation

Separatism meant different things to different groups of Quebeckers for some it meant total independence as a political state,

for others it meant sovereignty-association in a limited partnership with Canada and others believed that federalism was the best system for Canada

In 1968 the Parti Quebecois (PQ) was formed and with this the separatist movement gained strength

By 1973, PQ was the official opposition in Quebec

Quebec Official Languages Act In 1974 the Quebec Official Languages

Act (Bill 22) was introduced which proclaimed French as the only official language in Quebec, for many Quebeckers Bill 22 fell short of requiring French to be the language of instruction and everyday use for all Quebec citizens

Bill 101

After 1976 provincial election, Bill 101 (the Charter of the French Language) was passed; French became the official language for most facets of public life (for example, under Bill 101, all companies in

Quebec with 50 or more employees had to conduct business in French, companies were given 4 years to put this into action)

Bill 101 cont…

One of the most controversial sections of Bill 101 prohibited the use of English on commercial and road signs for 3 reasons1. The use of other languages on signs would

marginalize the French language in Quebec2. Immigrants to Quebec would recognize the

predominantly French character of the province

3. French would be preserved as Quebec’s official language

Bill 101 -

This law was later challenged under the Charter at the Supreme Court (Ford v. Quebec Attorney General, 1988.) The S.C.C. struck down the controversial provisions of the Bill.

The Quebec government has subsequently used the “notwithstanding clause” (s. 33) to over-ride the Charter for this issue.

Bill 101 has been amended many times (for example now other languages can be on

signs as long as French is the predominant language on the sign)

The Sovereignty Issue

Between 1980 and 2003, the controversy over Quebec’s role in Canada did not decrease; there are 4 critical events that must be highlighted during these years

The Parti-Quebecois viewed their election to the provincial government as a mandate to try to negotiate a “Sovereignty-Association” agreement with the rest of Canada.

The 1980 Referendum

May 20, 1980- date for promised referendum on Quebec’s future in Canada

Campaigned for sovereignty-association

Nearly 60% voted NON to sovereignty-association

The 1995 Referendum

1994 Elections brought a new man in power of PQ, Jacques Parizeau.

After Meech Lake and Charlottetown, the Quebec government held a referendum on October 30, 1995 which asked the question should Quebec separate from the rest of Canada.

Federalists argued economic costs of separation; Aboriginals opposed separation because they were uncertain whether or not they would be able to remain part of Canada

Result - 50.6% voted NON Federal government’s response to this was trying to

convince Quebeckers that life in separate Quebec would be difficult and costly

Federal Government Response The federal government took action and referred  the

matter to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court had to decide whether:n Under the Constitution of Canada, can Quebec secede

from Canada unilaterally?n Under International Law, can Quebec secede

unilaterally?n In the event of a conflict between domestic and

international law on the right of Quebec to secede from Canada unilaterally, which one would take precedence over the other?

Supreme Court Decision

Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Quebec had no unilateral right to secede without consulting the rest of Canada.

However, the Supreme Court also stated: But. . . . “the right of other provinces and the federal

government cannot deny the right of the government of Quebec to pursue secession, should a clear majority of the people of Quebec choose that goal.”

Also. . . if the people of Quebec were to win a referendum “by a clear majority on a clear question, “then Canada has a “constitutional duty to negotiate.”

Aftermath of the S.C.C Decision Court did not define what a “clear majority “was-

merely stated, “It is for the political actors to determine what

would constitute a clear majority on a clear question in the circumstances under which a future referendum vote may be taken”

The Clarity Act, 2000

Wanting to have a framework and process in place if Quebec (or any other province) sought to separate from Canada, Bill C-20 (the Clarity Act) was enacted December 13, 1999.

This Act outlined the rules and conditions to be met before the Canadian government enter into negotiations for the secession of any Province

1. It set out the principles and procedures that would require that any referendum question submitted to voters about succession be clear

2. Established that a clear majority of a provinces population is needed for a province to secede

The Clarity Act, 2000 cont…

If Quebec holds another referendum in the future regarding separation, no agreement will be negotiated without first establishing that the criteria for clarity have been met