According to what Prime Minister François Legault told the To have tohe “does not like the word federalist, because federalist is associated with the status quo. It is true that the prevailing discourse has made the label shameful, paradoxically at a time when Quebecers overwhelmingly reject the opposite idea of separation.
It is time for those who believe in the Canadian project to claim loud and clear the label “federalist”. Far from being synonymous with the status quo, the federal idea is associated with modernity, openness, dialogue and flexibility. This explains the durability of the authentic federations of the United States, Canada, Switzerland, Australia, Austria and Germany.
Quebec critics of the Canadian federal system point to the difficulty of amending the Constitution to satisfy the “traditional demands” of Quebec. It is true that the Constitution is made to last, which is the very essence of these documents. That said, in concrete terms, many changes have taken place, including those favoring Quebec’s autonomy. Unfortunately, each time a Quebec-Canada problem is resolved, the file is not put in the federation’s asset column. No, the subject disappears into a kind of black hole, to be replaced by another claim.
The best example of this phenomenon is the issue of manpower training, for which the Government of Quebec has claimed jurisdiction for several years. In 1997, an agreement was reached between the federal government and the provincial government (then led by the Parti Québécois) transferring to Quebec most of the powers in this area. Since then, this important development has been completely forgotten. We do not know, moreover, if the thing resulted in the improvement of said training.
Today, Mr. Legault’s government is calling for more powers in the area of immigration. However, most experts agree that Quebec already has, under the Quebec-Canada agreements on the subject, additional powers that it has not used (in particular on temporary immigrants). As for the jurisdictions that Ottawa wants to keep, refugees and family reunification, they come under Canada’s international obligations.
Anyway, do we really want, in Quebec, to admit only refugees who speak French? In other words, do we want to send a persecuted Iranian woman back to her country, on the pretext that she does not speak French? The answer is obvious, and indicates that even if Quebec had jurisdiction in this area, it would not change the evolution of the French language in the province.
Quebec has been recognized as a nation by the Canadian Parliament. I know, it’s not in the Constitution. Nevertheless, the symbolic value is considerable.
Moreover, the adoption of the concept of “asymmetrical federalism” means that in practically all agreements between Ottawa and the provinces, it is now assumed that Quebec will not participate and will receive financial compensation from the federal government. This is another “gain” (since that is how Quebec sees the relationship with the rest of Canada) that the sovereignists carefully avoid mentioning.
We could multiply the examples showing that far from being the rampart of the status quo, the Canadian federal system allows changes that increase the autonomy of the provinces, in particular of Quebec, and that allow them to better serve their citizens.
False dilemmas
Federalism is a noble idea, whose modern history dates back to the founding of the United States of America, and which has never ceased to evolve since, according to the specific circumstances of each federation. This is certainly the case with Canadian federalism which, if not perfect — what political system is? — has evolved considerably over the decades.
We often oppose federalism and nationalism, meaning that if you are a federalist, you cannot be a Quebec nationalist. This places Quebecers in a false dilemma: in a hurry to choose between federalism and their love for the nation, they inevitably choose the latter.
But we don’t have to choose. We can very well be both Quebec nationalists and federalists, because federalism is precisely designed to accommodate strong regional memberships.
The existence of a solid Constitution is also one of the characteristics of federalism. Yes, the Canadian Constitution is difficult to change, because it is what ensures the balance of powers between Ottawa and the provinces, which provides the stable framework that promotes prosperity, and which guarantees our fundamental rights.
No offense to Mr. Legault, being a federalist in Quebec does not mean being for the status quo, but choosing permanent change in order and stability.
As the great Tocqueville wrote two centuries ago, the federal system is “one of the most powerful combinations in favor of prosperity and human freedom”. There is something to be proud of.