Canada's PM Declares Quebec As A Nation Within Canada

Seen as a move to block an impending motion by the Bloc Quebecois, Prime Minister Stephen Harper shocked many Canadians last week by declaring Quebec as a separate nation.

What does that mean? It varies, depending on your political affiliation. First, the Bloc Quebecois, a political party that has always pushed for recognition of Quebec's french language and culture, was planning to propose the same motion. The difference was that "within Canada" would not be mentioned. This means that the possibility for Quebec to separate from Canada would always be an option. Harper's decision to put forward the motion is seen by some as a way to quash that possibility.

Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe, angered at Harper's move, said:

"We're tabling a motion that respects all sides without subjecting the recognition of a Quebec nation to partisan conditions. Yesterday, the prime minister did exactly the opposite. He tabled a motion that recognizes a Quebec nation with a condition attached -- a partisan string attached."

"The only respectful attitude toward Quebecers is to recognize them for what they are. ... A nation that doesn't stop being a nation whether it's no longer part of Canada, that's obvious, a nation with no conditions."

Some believe that it was simply a way for Harper's Consevatives to gain the support from the Bloc Quebcois, as support for Harper - especially his relationship with President Bush (a closer one than with our past two prime ministers) and his support for Canadian troops in Afghanastan - has weakened his popularity. In the case of a Federal Election, this might prove to be a strategic move to garner some support. But according to Duceppe speech on Parliment Hill last week, perhaps some people might support him, but most likely, the separatists in the party will not.

There has been a referendum on Quebec independence from Canada in the past, the last one in 1995 being narrowly defeated by Quebeckers. Despite the narrow defeat, the majority of people who reside in the province shared the same sentiments that many people feel now: the fear that this motion with further divide the country.

Submitted by lainad (view blog

) on Thu, 11/30/2006 - 11:13

Posted In

Comments (4)

Tell a Friend

Comments

Wow. I'm really surprised

Wow. I'm really surprised by this information. To think that Quebec could separate itself from Canada is strange for me.

I've worked with many Canadian customers in my former job and I knew the residents in the province wer capable of impacting the country, but not this much! It really would divide the country and negatively.

Submitted by Dana J. Tuszke on Thu, 11/30/2006 - 15:07

Separation

Separation from Canada is not a new idea in Quebec. It's been around since the 1940s if you want to date it back to the beginning of the Duplessis goverment and the Quiet Revolution. There was the FLQ crisis in October 1970 (aka the October Crisis or Black October) although the bombings started in the 1960s. And then Rene Levesque came to power in the last 1970s. Then in 1995 there was the Referendum. When I moved there in 1997 you could still feel the sting of that (the "Oui's" were generally not fond of the "No's" or the anglophones). Things were far less hostile when I left a few years ago.

The Bloc Quebecois (the main federal separatist party) doesn't seem to be a fan of this resolution, mostly likely due the fact that the resolution states that it's a nation "within a united Canada". I don't think the Harper government did not get the response that they were hoping to get from this in Quebec (so far...it's still very early).

Sassymonkey, Sassymonkey Reads, and Sassymonkey Eats

Submitted by sassymonkey on Thu, 11/30/2006 - 19:52

Balancing heritage preservation with common
sense

The tendency of those of French heritage to want to separate themselves to save that heritage is not new in general. At one point New Orleans, La., my hometown, didn't want to be part of the United States because Creoles felt the city's French heritage would be lost. In many ways it has been and that long before the flood. But I believe there are ways to preserve heritage without separating. Nevertheless, I admit I only know what I've read in the media about Quebec's debate. I've enjoyed my visits to Quebec because of its connection to the Frenchie in me. :-)

As I said, however, I'm still not convinced separation is the way to go when we want to preserve heritage. It's the same excuse, the preservation of heritage, that southern whites in America used to push racial segregation and to cling to the vestiges of the Confederacy. I'm inclined to believe separatist language is always a smokescreen for something more sinister, often a group's or a person's quest for power in a smaller pond or the belief that one group is superior to another. Naturally the root separatist thought divides.

"Love is liquid. Be drunkards!" ~~Nordette

Submitted by Nordette on Fri, 12/01/2006 - 15:17

I wish they would just go...

The money and special interest that has been laid upon that province is an insult to the rest of Canada.

Due to the vast size of Canada, the various climates and topography and the cultures and ethnic groups that settled here, every bleeding province would have to declared distinct.

I realize Harper is just protecting his votes in Quebec at the moment. But it won't work.

People used to suck up to Quebec because of it's large population and resources. But really....with Alberta's wealth and the prospect of offshore drilling in BC....they ain't so important anymore.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
If you want the world to recognize you as a distinct nation...then guess what...no more federal CANADIAN dollars, no working IN CANADA without a visa. Creating trade agreements with the rest of Canada and so on.

With the privilege of being a nation, must come the responsibility.

And really..what does this nation within a nation thing mean to say...the aboriginals of Canada?

Submitted by Crunchy Carpets on Sat, 12/02/2006 - 09:07