Québec's Positions on Constitutionaland Intergovernment Al Issues
QUÉBEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONALAND INTERGOVERNMENT AL ISSUES
FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001
Globalization,theFederativeDeficit andtheCaseofQuébec.Speechby Joseph Facal, Minister for Canadian IntergovernmentalAffairs,deliveredon theOccasionoftheXVIIIth WorldCon- gress of the International Political ScienceAssociation,MuséeduQuébec,
August3,2000.
•••
[Translation]
Iamdelightedtowelcomeyouto Québec and to our national capital, QuébecCity.Foundedin1608,Québec Citywillsoonbecelebrating400yearsof existence,makingitoneoftheoldestcities ontheNorthAmericancontinent.Itwas here,in1791,nearlythree-quartersof a centurybeforethecreationof Canada, thatthefirstelectedparliamentof this NorthAmericancolonywasestablished. QuébecCityhasbeen,andcontinuesto be,thecradleofapeoplethatnotonly playedaroleinthefoundingofCanada, butalsopredateditand,tosomeextent, paved the way for the introduction of representativepoliticalinstitutions.
Inrecenttimes,anewwordhasentered ourvocabulary,describingaconceptthat isincreasinglylikelytoshapeourdaily livesasindividuals,asapeopleandasa State.Thewordinquestionisglobaliza- tion,anddefiningitisnoeasytask.The Websterdescribesitinverygeneralterms as “toorganizeorestablishworldwide.” Whatisprimarilyinvolvedhereisabasi- callyeconomicphenomenon—themarket economylogic,whoseinfluenceatthe continental and global levels is growing steadilyinimportance.
Ourtraditionalpointsofreference, namelyEast/WestblocksandNorth/South relations,areeitheroutdatedorhave undergonearadicaltransformation.We arelivinginaneraofinstantaneouschange, inaworldwithincreasinglyopeneconomic
boundaries,whereourinteractions,for- merlyconcentratedinasmallcircle,now cutacrossstateandculturalboundaries, inacontextdominatedbytheexplosionof newtechnologiesforcommunicationsand exchange.
Thus,theconceptofglobalizationin- volvesamoreopenworldeconomicmarket, theemergenceofaworldknowledgeand informationeconomy,andaplanet-wide distributionofpoliticalandculturalvalues arisingfromparticularcontexts.
Itisthereforenotdifficulttounder- standthatglobalizationcancreatesources oftensionanduncertainty.Indeed,italters thespatialorganizationofavastrangeof humanactivitiesthatarenowcarriedout onatranscontinentalorinter-regional basis,withallthatthisimpliesforthe exerciseofStateprerogatives.
Globalizationisbynomeansanew phenomenon.Ithasalwaysbeenpresent insocialevolution.However,itwasa questionofdegree.Inancienttimes,it wasquitepossibleforsocietiestolivein autarky.Butthisdidnotlast.Contacts wereforged.Athousandyearslater,autar- kywasstillpossiblebutlessprobable. Andtoday,thehandfulofStatesthat,for mainlyideologicalreasons,stillattemptto practiseithaverunintoeconomicand socialproblemsthatthreatentheirvery existence.
Inshort,themaincharacteristicof globalizationinitscurrentformisitsscope, andperhapsalsothefeelingunderlyingit, namelythatwehavegonepastthepoint ofnoreturn.Today,globalizationisno longeralinearprocess,butamultidimen- sionalprocessthatcanbemeasuredin allthemainspheresofhumanactivity,in political, economic, social, cultural, admin- istrative,legal,military,technologicaland environmentallife.Itischaracterizedby theextentandclose-knitnatureofitsnet- worksandbytheintensityofitsflows.Its
197
QUÉBEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONALAND INTERGOVERNMENT AL ISSUES
FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001
impactonsocieties,groupsandindivid- ualsdiffersinintensity,althoughsome peoplegoasfarastodescribeitasaveri- tablerevolution.
Atthepoliticallevel,thisleadsinevi- tablytochangesinthewaypowerisexer- cised.If,atsomepointinthefuture,a theoryofglobalizationweretobedeveloped, itwouldhavetoaddresssuchfundamental questionsasthetieringofdecision-making authoritiesandtheunequaldistributionof accesstopower,withallthatthisimplies forthewelfareofpeoples,groupsand individualsandfortheinfluencetheyare likelytogainorloseonthecheckerboard ofglobalization.
Intheeyesofsomeobservers,the adventofglobalizationhassoundedthe death-knellofthenation-stateconcept.If thestructureoftheorganizationscreated toimplementglobalizationisanyindica- tion.Ihavemydoubtsastothevalidityof thisstatement.Attheveryleast,itseems tometobepremature.Theconceptof nation-statethathasshapedthepolitical, economicandsocialorganizationofour societiesinthepost-Westphalianageseems tometobeasfirmlyentrenchedasever. Thisdoesnotmean,though,thatglobal- izationwillnotbringsomefar-reaching changesinthefuture—onthecontrary. Suchchangesarealreadyknockingatour door,especiallyinourperceptionofthe hierarchical order of our political players. Indeed,becausethephenomenonof globalization causes perspectives to change, it follows that the development of the State,henceforthperceivedasperipheral, willbeapproachedfromamuchmore regionalperspective.Thischangeinthe perceptionandintheveryorderofthings willinevitablyraisethequestionofhow muchflexibilitythenewlocalcommunities willhaveinfutureinthefaceofrestric- tionsarisingfrompoliticalandeconomic decisionsmadeatthecentre.Asaresult,
thediscourseonlocalautonomywillhave tobebroughtuptodateandperhapseven completelyoverhauled.
Otherobservershavenotedthat,at thepoliticallevel,globalizationcausesthe publicspacetoshrink,inthatthecitizens andtheStatelosesomeoftheirpower overthepoliticalandsocialagenda,and overtheirabilitytoestablishpriorities withinthepoliticalagenda.Theexperience oftheEuropeanUnion,whichisbothan advanced and a regional form of globaliza- tion,hasprovedthis,andanewtermhas beencoinedtodescribethissideeffectof globalization:the“democraticdeficit.” Basically,ithasbeenobserved,inthe caseofEurope,thatportionsofsovereignty havebeenwithdrawnfromnationalpar- liamentsandtransferredtotheEuropean Union’spoliticalauthorities.Ifsuchtrans- fershave,ingeneral,beenquitesmooth, itisprobablybecausethemaindecision- makingauthorityremainstothisdaythe CounciloftheEuropeanUnion,composed ofallthememberStates.However,asthe Councilisintendedfirstandforemostto beanintergovernmentalforum,theStates arenaturallyrepresentedbytheirrespec- tiveexecutives,withinarelativelyclosed framework.Asaresult,thenationalpar- liaments—inotherwords,thelegislative branch—hasbeenexcludedfromthe conceptionofpublicpolicyinmanyareas. Thesametrendcanbeseeninother internationalforums,althoughwithless obviousrepercussions,sinceinthesecases thetransfersofsovereigntyhavebeen indirect.However,twomainpointsremain constant.First,itistheStateexecutives thattakepartintheseforums,andsecond, thegeneralpublicisusuallykeptaside fromthedeliberationsandthedecision-
makingprocess.
Inaddition,thedecisionsthatare eventuallymadetendtobeirreversible, evenif,inmanycases,thegovernments
198
QUÉBEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONALAND INTERGOVERNMENT AL ISSUES
FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001
concernedneedtheapprovaloftheirown nationalparliamentsbeforeimplementing them.Thereisusuallynorealpossibility ofbacktracking,becauseaStatewhose parliamentconsistentlyrefusedtoapprove theconventionsdrawnupattheinterna- tionallevelwouldeffectivelybecondemning itself,inthemediumterm,toaformof exclusion.
Thephenomenonofthedemocratic deficitraisesaseriousproblem,because mostliberaldemocraticconstitutionsare basedonadelicatebalanceinwhichState prerogativesaresharedbetweenthelegis- lative,executiveandjudicialbranches. Indeed,thedemocraticnatureofaconsti- tutionliespreciselyinthatbalance,which precludesdominationbyonebranchorone individualandallowsforthebroadestpos- sibleparticipationintheState’spoliticallife. Generallyspeaking,whensovereignty isdividedupinthisway,theexecutive branchhasjurisdictionoverforeignrela- tions,includingthepowertoenterintotrea- ties.However,itisimportanttoremember thatthistypicalallocationofpowerwas firstdevisedatatimewheninternational relationsweremuchlessimportantthan theyaretoday,andwhenwarwasacentral element,thereforejustifyingthesecrecy
surroundingthem.
SincetheendoftheSecondWorldWar, internationalrelationshavedeveloped tosuchanextentandhavebecomeso importantthat,insomecases,modelna- tionallawsarenowactuallybeingdrawn upbehindthedoorsofinternationalforums, onsubjectsasvariedasprivatelawand taxation.Giventhatthistypeofworkwas originallymeanttocomeunderthejuris- dictionoftheState’slegislativebranch,it iseasytoseehowglobalizationcanchange theconstitutionalbalanceofliberaldemoc- racies.
Incountrieswheresovereignty,inaddi- tiontobeingsharedbetweenthelegislative,
executiveandjudicialbranches,isalso sharedbetweenafederalgovernmentand federatedentities(asisthecaseinCanada), thedeficitisevengreater.Indeed,while thesubjectsaddressedininternational forumsusedtobemainlythoseusually fallingunderfederaljurisdiction,suchas defence,navigationandinternationaltrade, thisisnolongerthecasetoday.
Witheconomicliberalizationandits corollary,freedomofmovement,itis increasinglyclearthatevenlocalpolicies, whichusuallycomeunderprovincialjuris- diction(socialpolicies,forexample),canno longerbedrawnupinavacuumandmust alsobediscussedattheinternationallevel. However,statepracticeshowsthat, whereasfederationsareconcerned,itis usuallytheexecutivebranchofthefederal governmentthattakespartintheinterna- tionalforumsatwhichagrowingpercent- ageofpublicpolicies,eventhosefalling inprincipleundertheexclusivejurisdiction ofthefederatedentities,arenowconceived. Globalizationhasthereforehadthe effect, in federations like Canada, of dis- turbingtheinstitutionalandconstitutional balanceevenfurther.Thishasproduceda secondtypeofimbalance,whichIwillcall
the“federativedeficit.”
Thefederativedeficitisjustasworrying asthedemocraticdeficit—andwithgood reason. In many liberal democracies, especiallythosethathaveaparliamentary systembasedontheBritishmodel,asis thecaseinCanada,theseparationofpower betweentheexecutiveandlegislative branchesoftheStatehasbecomemuch lessmarkedovertheyears,forreasons thathavenothingtodowithglobalization. However,thedistributionofpowerbe- tweenthevariouslevelsofgovernmentin afederationisstilljustascrucialtodayas ithasalwaysbeen,becausewithoutit, there can be no federal system. In Canada,weknowallaboutthis!
199
QUÉBEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONALAND INTERGOVERNMENT AL ISSUES
FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001
Globalization therefore presents a sizeablechallengetofederalsystems.By maintainingthecurrentmonopolyoffed- eralexecutivesoverinternationalrelations, weareinevitablywitnessinganerosionof thefederalprincipleastherangeofpublic policiesdiscussedontheinternational stagegrows.
Thefederalprincipleiserodingbe- cause,throughglobalization,thefederated entitiesarelosingmuchoftheirlatitude inconceivingpublicpolicies,andarenot beingcompensatedforthisbybeingallowed toparticipatedirectlyintheappropriate internationalforums,asareunitaryStates andfederalgovernments.
Toaddtotheproblem,thissituation benefitsthefederalgovernmentinasecond way:bygrantingitselftherighttodebate subjectsusuallyunderthejurisdictionof provinces,thecentralgovernmentiseffect- inganettransferofprovincialjurisdiction initsfavour.Ihardlyneedaddthatthe growthininternationalactivityfromwhich thistransferresults,andwhichisbased ultimatelyonthedevelopmentofcommu- nicationtechnologies,willcertainlybe gatheringspeedinthefuture.
Ifthefederalprincipleistobepreserved inthecontextofglobalization,thefeder- atedentitieswouldhavetohavecontrolof theirowninternationalrelationsforall issuesrelatedtotheirexclusiveinternal jurisdiction,andconverselythefederalgov- ernmentswouldhavetoagreetolimit theirinterventionstoexchangesconcerned solelywithmattersundertheirownjuris- diction.
InQuébec,thisideaisbynomeansnew. PaulGérin-Lajoie,amanofgreatvision whowasQuébec’sMinisterofEducation atthetimeoftheQuietRevolution,was alreadytalkingaboutitin1965,overthirty yearsago.Iquote:
[…]themultiplicationofexchange of allkindsbetweencountrieshas
necessitated thedirectorindirect interventionofthemodernstate sothattheseexchangesmaybe madebasicelementsofprogress, ofunderstandingandofpeacebe- tween peoples. In many fields whichhavenowassumedinterna- tionalimportance,Quebecwishes toplayadirectroleinkeeping withitstruecountenance.[…] TherewasatimewhenOttawa’s exclusiveexerciseofinternational powerswasscarcelyprejudicialto theinterestsofthefederatedstates, inasmuchasthefieldofinterna- tionalrelationswasfairlywell defined.
But,inourday,thisisnolonger so.Interstaterelationsnowtouch everyaspectofsociallife.Thisis why,inafederationsuchasCanada, it is now necessary for those mem- bergroups,whowishtodoso,to participateactivelyanddirectlyin the preparation of international agreementswithwhichtheyare immediatelyconcerned.[…]Itis notadmissible[…]forthefederal statetoexertakindofsupervision and adventitious control over Quebec’sinternationalrelations.
(Address delivered by Mr. Paul Gérin-Lajoie,MinisterofEducation totheMembersoftheMontreal ConsularCorps,Monday,April12,
1965,attheWindsorHotel)
Obviously,themainproblemstanding inthewayofsuchasolution,forQuébec and for members of other federations, wouldbetheresistanceofthecentralgov- ernmentsastheyjealouslyprotecttheir prerogatives.IntheCanada/Québecsitua- tion,thereisalsotheconstitutionalstand- pattismtowhichwehavebeenirrevocably condemnedeversincetheadoptionofthe
1982Constitutionwithouttheagreement ofQuébec,thecradleofoneofthetwo peoplesresponsibleforthefoundationof theCanadianfederationin1867.
Itisthereforeclearthatifweareunable toleaveroomforthefederatedentitieson
200
QUÉBEC'S POSITIONS ON CONSTITUTIONALAND INTERGOVERNMENT AL ISSUES
FROM 1936 TO MARCH 2001
theinternationalstage,andcontinueto reserveitexclusivelyforfullysovereign States,thefederatedentitiesthathavethe meanstodosowillnaturallyseekachange intheirstatus,drivenbytheneedtoensure thattheircommunitiesareabletodevelop totheirfullpotential.
Thistemptationwillbeallthegreater sinceglobalizationhastheeffectofreducing oneofthegainsofthefederalsystem, namelythemaintenanceandprotectionof acommoneconomicspace.Giventhatthis gaincouldhenceforthdependincreasingly ontheinternationalorder,manyfederated entitiesmayfindthattheyarenolongersatis- fiedwiththeircurrentpoliticalarrangements. IntheeyesoftheQuébecgovernment, thereisnodoubtthat,insuchcircumstances, globalizationhasrenderedQuébecsover- eigntyevenmorenecessaryandmoreurgent thaneverbefore.Itbringsanewimpetus andawaveofmodernitytoournational project.Thosewhousedtoclaimthatwe wereengagedinarear-guardbattlemust nowthinkagain.AsBernardLandry, Québec’s Vice-Premier and Minister of State fortheEconomyandFinance,saidrecently, inthenewworldcontext,sovereigntyisno longersimplyaquestionofsurvival,pros- perityandinternationalinfluencefornations; theveryqualityoftheirdemocraticlifehas beencalledintoquestionbythephenomenon
ofglobalization.
Itisthereforeimperativeandurgent forQuébectomoveclosertotheemerging supranationalpowersthatwill,inthe future,playanincreasinglyimportantrole inmaintaininganddevelopingthecollec- tivewell-beingofQuebecers.Giventhat participationintheseinternationalforums isreservedsolelyforrecognizedStates, ourdemocraticdutyrequiresustoactif wearetopreservewhatweareandpro- cure a promising future for our community.
The Québec government’s goal continues tobedemocraticaccessiontosovereign statusforQuébec.In1998,inanopinion requestedbythefederalgovernmenton Québec’ssecession,theSupremeCourtof Canadarecognizedthedemocraticvalidity oftheQuébecsovereignistproject.More recently,theQuébecgovernmenthashad todenouncetheCanadianfederalparlia- ment’sadoptionofanActdesignedto placefurtherobstaclesinthewayofthe desireofQuebecerstomovetowardssover- eignty,thusultimatelygivingtheEnglish- speakingmajorityintherestofCanadaa vetoonQuébec’sfuture.
ThroughBillC-20,theFederalParlia- mentis attemptingtoclaimforitselfthe righttodictatethewordingofthereferen- dumquestionandtheprojecttobedebated when,infact,theseelementsarepartof theprerogativesoftheNationalAssembly andthepeopleofQuébec.WithBillC-20, theFederalParliamentisalsoattacking fundamentaldemocraticprinciplesbysetting asidethe50%+1ruleinfavourofa thresholdthatitwillsetarbitrarilyonce thereferendumresultsareknown.Itis alsoattemptingtoimposeunilaterallya listofsubjectstobedealtwithinpost- referendumnegotiations.However,nowhere intheadvisoryopinionrenderedbythe SupremeCourtofCanadaistheFederal Parliamentauthorizedorinvitedtoadopt suchlegislativemeasures.
Itisthuseasytounderstandthatthis Act has been responsible for a further deteriorationinrelationsbetweenQuébec andCanadawithintheCanadianfederation, bycallingintoquestionthefreedomofthe Québecpeopleindecisionsconcerningits politicalfuture,aswellastheprerogatives of the State of Québec, the only majoritarily French-speakingStateinNorthAmerica.
[…]
Source:Textofthespeech.
201