Courtesy
By Guy Rex Rodgers
Local Journalism Initiative
Thirty years ago this October, Quebec held a referendum on sovereignty. After the ballots were tabulated 2,308,360 Quebecers had voted yes and 2,362,648 had voted no. Everyone old enough to have lived through the bruising battle for independence retains vivid memoires.
The 1995 referendum was the final round of a series of constitutional negotiations that embroiled the entire country from the Meech Lake Accord in 1987 to the Charlottetown Accord, which received the approval of the federal government and all 10 provincial governments, but was rejected by Canadian voters in October 1992. Disappointment and frustration set the stage for Quebec’s 1995 referendum on sovereignty, a bitterly contested campaign for the future of Quebec and Canada. The referendum is remembered in sound bites and headlines: lobster traps, a federal love-in, allegations of stolen votes, threats of partitions, and the infamous ‘money and the ethnic vote.’
I wonder how many voters remember the referendum question from 1995? It was clearer than the cautious, 106-word question of 1980, which had requested a ‘mandate to negotiate’ sovereignty-association, while promising that ‘any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum.’ The 35-word question of 1995 was more direct. ‘Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign, after having formally offered Canada a new economic and political partnership under the bill respecting the future of Quebec and the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?’
The referendum question spawned a multitude of ancillary questions. Some of them pragmatic: what if Canada does not accept the offer outlined in the June 12 agreement? Other questions were existential: what if a majority of Quebecers votes yes, but the minority who votes no refuses to leave Canada? Divorces are rarely simple or collaborative.
The philosophical question raised by the referendum was simply: why? Why are we doing this? In the case of a divorce, the reason is clear. “I am so unhappy in this relationship that I am prepared to endure almost anything and lose almost everything to get out of it.” Some who voted for independence were adamant that any price was worth paying to free Quebec from its intolerable relationship with Canada. And yet the agreement signed on June 12, 1995 outlined a ‘partnership treaty’ whereby Canada and Quebec would ‘share power’ over trade, monetary policy, citizenship and use of the Canadian dollar. The 1995 referendum proposed a revised partnership rather than a divorce.
A cynic could infer that the Parizeau-Bouchard-Dumont plan was yet another variation of Yvon Deschamps’ ‘independent Quebec within a united Canada.’ A realist would observe that history and geography make it inevitable that Quebec will collaborate on multiple levels with its nearest neighbours.
The philosophical question remained: why? Every book I have read that promotes Quebec’s independence begins with the Conquest of 1759, perceived as a brutal and humiliating loss for the inhabitants of Nouvelle France. The underlying reason for independence is to undo the damage of the Conquest. The dream is to liberate the descendants of Nouvelle France from the Conqueror and restore pre-Conquest culture and language. Would sovereignty-association or a renewed partnership treaty with Canada erase the Conquest? Would political autonomy for Quebec remove the English-language and its influence? Current polling shows Quebecers are far more favourable toward bilingualism than a 3rd referendum.
Thirty years probably gives us enough distance to reflect on the 1995 referendum with some objectivity. I am conducting a research project and inviting people to share their memories of 1995, their reaction to the outcome, and thoughts about the 3rd referendum that the Parti Québécois is promising to hold if they win next year’s election. This research is connected to work I have been doing to investigate education in Quebec. Many readers of Townships Weekend have filled out the education survey and I have enjoyed fascinating and informative conversations with you. I’m sure you have vivid memories of 1995 and strong thoughts about a 3rd referendum. I invite you to take a few minutes to fill out a short survey at the following url. I look forward to hearing from you. https://tinyurl.com/surveyOuiNon1995