Find out what Beyer had to say
Election are always a hot topic
When is the Budget not a hot searchVICTORIA – There’s no doubt Canadian politicians learned their lesson from the ill-fated Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords. The lesson is: don’t exclude the public out of any constitutional deals.
After meeting in Calgary, the countries premiers, sans Lucien Bouchard, nearly fell over themselves declaring that any constitutional changes will be attempted only after extensive public consultation. No more back room deals.
The nine premiers had met solely to discuss the Canadian unity issue. Unlike before, they decided not to wait until Bouchard forces the country’s hand again by holding another referendum in Quebec.
The premiers obviously remembered that during the run-up to the October 1995 referendum, we all got caught off guard and nearly lost the country. And even though the public at large may have no appetite for constitutional talks at this time, our political leaders recognize that, like it or not, we’ve got to deal with the problem or risk the break-up of Canada again.
The premiers came up with an idea that may prove to be as effective as it is simple. Rather than belaboring the old term "distinct society," viewed with suspicion by most Anglophones, they proposed to recognize Quebec as a "unique" place within Canadian federation. The exact words of Article 5 of the Calgary Declaration is as follows:
"In Canada’s federal system, where respect for diversity and quality underlies unity, the unique character of Quebec society, including its French-speaking majority, its culture and its tradition of civil law, is fundamental to the well-being of Canada. Consequently, the legislature and government of Quebec have a role to protect and develop the unique character of Quebec society within Canada."
Other articles of the declaration call for equality of all provinces, a favorite demand of the Reform Party, and set out guiding principles for Canada as a special place where tolerance and compassion are prized principles.
But it’s the "unique character" phrase that will be the acid test of Canada’s willingness to make a concession to Quebec that is largely rhetorical and metaphoric. I never had a problem with "distinct society" either but the majority of Anglophones did.
The other part of this renewed approach to achieve unity by incorporating Quebec’s aspirations into the constitution is the solemn pledge to involve the public in the debate. Failure to do so was to a large extent responsible for the sinking of Meech and Charlottetown.
Initial reaction to the Calgary Declaration has been encouraging. Prime Minister Jean Chretien, who had been a fierce defender of the "distinct society" clause, all but abandoned it to embrace the "unique character" wording.
Quebec Liberal leader Daniel Johnson, Reform leader Preston Manning and NDP leader Alexa McDonough also expressed support for the Calgary Declaration.
The only one who dismissed the premiers’ efforts as well as the "unique character" description was Bouchard. The Parti Quebecois leader and avowed separatist said the declaration had nothing new to offer Quebec.
The beauty, however, is that it won’t matter one iota what Bouchard thinks. This is a battle for the hearts and minds of Canadians, both inside and outside Quebec. If the intent of the Calgary Declaration proves acceptable to English-speaking Canadians, it will have a good chance of being equally acceptable to Quebec.
The end result would be that next time Quebec voters are asked to cast their ballots for or against separation, they will respond with a resounding no. And that would take care of Bouchard and his agenda.
If, on the other hand, Anglophones reject the Calgary Declaration during the rounds of public talks and debate that will take place, we may yet again face the potential breakup of Canada.
This time, the fate of Canada is in everybody’s hands.
