The Coalition avenir Québec has never denied the fact that the abolition of the position of lieutenant-governor was still part of its intentions as set out in 2015 in the document A new project for Quebec nationalists. Last year, the Minister responsible for Canadian Relations, Sonia LeBel, confirmed that doing away with this symbol still figured in the CAQ plans, although the thing is complex, which we can agree, and that the context must be s lend to it.
However, it cannot be denied that the death of Queen Elizabeth II and her replacement by King Charles III changed this context and rekindled the debate in Quebec — and, to a lesser extent, in Canada — on the advisability of cutting ties with the British monarchy. This is a debate that is also brewing in other Commonwealth countries whose head of state is still this foreign sovereign. This is the case for tiny countries, such as Antigua and Barbuda, but also for New Zealand and Australia.
In the election campaign on Friday, François Legault put the lid on the pot for the duration of a future mandate. The CAQ leader could have said that it was not a priority for his government at the moment, but he rather postponed any attempt to shake off the monarchical yoke. It is a short-sighted decision: four years in politics is several eternities; many things can happen.
It is true that the monarchists do not have too much to worry about. First, it is only in Quebec that a vast majority of the population—nearly three-quarters—says in poll after poll that they want to put an end to this colonial remnant. In English Canada, this majority is much lower, and opinions are divided. The monarchy, the British crown, is still part of the identity values of many English Canadians. We will see what reception they will reserve for the unloved Charles. Let’s bet they’ll get over it.
Then, to get rid of the monarchy, or even to touch only the post of lieutenant-governor of Quebec, requires an amendment to the Constitution involving the consent of the federal Parliament, the Parliaments of each of the provinces and the Senate. It follows that, on this question, and on many others, the Constitution is locked fourfold.
Without declaring its independence, is Quebec condemned to undergo a monarchy which was imposed on it and which it does not want, an outdated symbol, certainly, but that of an ever present subjection? Some will answer that it is in the order of things.
However, other avenues are being explored to try to break this political deadlock. A certain number of people defend the idea of creating a republic in Quebec, including the jurist André Binette. He believes that the appropriate response to the patriation of the Canadian Constitution of 1982 without the consent of the Quebec nation is the abolition of the monarchy in a Quebec constitution. A majority in the National Assembly representing a majority of voters would be sufficient to adopt this text.
In this constitution, the office of lieutenant-governor appointed by Ottawa would be abolished; he would be replaced by a Quebec head of state appointed by two-thirds of the National Assembly or elected by universal suffrage. His role would be essentially the same as that of the lieutenant-governor; it is he who, in particular, would promulgate the laws and dissolve Parliament when necessary. In Ireland or Iceland, for example, this role, with its ceremonial, is fulfilled by a recognized personality, a sage respected by all political actors.
Once the Quebec constitution is in force, thanks to which Quebec would exercise its right to internal self-determination, it is expected that the federal government will maintain the office of lieutenant-governor. Ottawa would take over from the Quebec government, which would have ceased to assume the expenses of the representative of the monarchy. Two possibilities then open up: Quebec no longer submits the laws adopted by the National Assembly to the imprimatur of the Lieutenant-Governor, and it is up to the new President of the Republic to take on this task exclusively or, again, to for a time at least, the two concurrent functions coexist and overlap. In the first case, it is guaranteed constitutional crisis, and we would see where that would lead us.
It takes imagination to extricate oneself from an illegitimate constitution and outdated colonial institutions while remaining subject to them. But the project to provide Quebec with a written constitution is not far-fetched. It is a necessary, albeit incomplete, act of affirmation that our National Assembly, exercising its parliamentary sovereignty, can perfectly accomplish.