An exceptional man passed away on March 30, 2024: the teacher, the researcher, the MP and the minister Benoît Pelletier. His premature departure saddens us collectively and has given rise to touching testimonies.
I would like to add my voice to this concert of well-deserved praise to which a respected colleague and a respectful adversary have been entitled.
Benoît was first and foremost an academic. As a teacher, he will have been appreciated by many generations of students at the Faculty of Law of the University of Ottawa. As a researcher, he leaves behind high quality output and has distinguished himself with publications characterized by their scientific rigor.
Building on his doctoral thesis, his work on Constitutional amendment in Canada published in 1996 remains today one of the major contributions to the study of Chapter V of the Constitutional Act of 1982.
While being a promoter of individual rights, he was convinced of the importance of ensuring, as the Law on the secularism of the State and the Law on the official and common language, French, affirmed in turn, a balance between the collective rights of the Quebec nation and the rights and freedoms of the individual.
In his recent writings and going against the views expressed within his liberal political family, he has also come to the defense of his two fundamental laws and has also been a supporter of the adoption of a Quebec Constitution.
His voice will not, to my great regret, be heard on June 22, 2024 during a conference celebrating the 250e anniversary of the adoption of the Quebec Act and with the theme “The Constitution of Quebec: time to act”, during which our respected colleague agreed to speak.
A respectful opponent
During the ten years in which he held public office by sitting in the National Assembly as member for Chapleau and assumed several ministerial functions within the Executive Council of Quebec, Benoît Pelletier behaved with the dignity that should always be sought. officers of the Quebec state.
In the exercise of all of his ministerial functions, whether it concerns the Canadian Francophonie, Aboriginal Affairs, the Reform of Democratic Institutions, Access to Information or the Agreement on internal trade, he listened to his partners and had the interests of Quebecers at heart.
In his Aboriginal Affairs portfolio, he proved to be a valued interlocutor for the ten First Nations and the Inuit nation. In the Canadian Intergovernmental Affairs file, which was undoubtedly the one in which he truly wanted to make progress for Quebec, he played a determining role in the creation of the Council of the Federation and the conclusion of the Agreement between the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada relating to UNESCO.
On the question of the political status of Quebec, we agreed to base it on the right of the Quebec people to self-determination. In our discussions during the study of the appropriations of the Canadian Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat that a columnist from the newspaper The sun, the late Jean-Jacques Samson, had described as “elegant”, he will affirm that his federalism was based “on a principle which is the right of Quebecers to choose their future”. He added: “But who says the right to choose necessarily means that there is more than one option on the table, otherwise we would not be talking about a choice. One of these legitimate options, of course, is the secessionist option, but it is not the option that we favor. »
Benoît Pelletier will have been a respectful adversary of the Quebec separatists, and the supporters of sovereignty will also have been admiring of these efforts to “strengthen Quebec in the Canadian space […]to improve the Canadian federation, but in a sense that is compatible with the fundamental interests of Quebecers.
A confidence
I was given the opportunity to have multiple exchanges with Benoît Pelletier, during conferences, conferences and university seminars, on television sets, in The duty and its Ideas page and, of course, at the Salon Bleu at the Parliament Building in Quebec.
Never doubting that a debate with Benoît Pelletier would be characterized by courtesy, I always accepted face-to-face meetings, particularly on the question of the political status of Quebec, where our positions diverged.
I remember only one meeting that didn’t materialize. On October 30, 1995, Radio-Canada invited us to comment on the result of the referendum organized by the government of Jacques Parizeau if the YES side won. But, at 11:10 p.m., when it was announced that the NO option had won and obtained barely more than 50,000 votes more than the YES (50.56% against 49.44%) ), we learned that it was no longer necessary to comment on… the YES victory. I anticipated that the respectful opponent, as a great democrat, would accept the result and support the people of Quebec in their decision to achieve independence.
To my great regret, he will not be with us during a future referendum meeting, which could occur between 2026 and 2030, and during which he could have made his voice heard again. And, who knows, if this time, he would have chosen to join the YES camp.
I will miss you, Benoît. All of Quebec will miss you, Benoît Pelletier.