|
The Fair Federation
(March 9, 2001)
Mr. Chrétien's
government is offering to Mr. Landry's new government its full collaboration
in order to help Quebecers continually improve their quality of life in
Canada. As the government of all Canadians, we have a duty to work with
all provincial governments, whatever their political orientation.
But the federal
government also has a duty not to leave unanswered any unfair comment on
Canada. Our conduct will not change: we will react to any unfair statements
coming from Premier Landry's government, just as we did when Mr. Bouchard
held that office. We will answer politely, but clearly.
In the weeks
before he assumed the leadership of his party, Mr. Bernard Landry
unflaggingly reiterated the same discourse. It can be summed up in two
propositions. First, Mr. Landry alleges that Quebec is one nation and
Canada is another nation. Second, since nations only maintain relations of
coldly calculated self-interest, according to Mr. Landry, the Quebec nation,
being smaller than the Canadian nation, inevitably gets the short end of the
stick within Canada. In Mr. Landry's own words: "[...] il est
immanquable que la nation qui contrôle se serve d'abord."
"[...] it is inevitable that the nation that is in control serve
itself first." [translation] (Speech by Bernard Landry,
Hull, February 26, 2001).
1. Quebec receives its fair share
I will begin by
refuting Mr. Landry's second proposition. Quebecers are not victims of
discrimination.
There are many
advantages in belonging to Canada, but I will examine this issue solely from
the angle proposed by Mr. Landry: comparing the federal government's
spending in Quebec and the revenues it draws from this province.
Let's look at the
figures. The relevant data from Statistics Canada's provincial economic
accounts are very consistent from year to year. So the most recent available
data, from 1998, are completely representative. In that year, Quebecers
received 24.2% of total federal spending. Well, Quebec's population is
exactly 24.2% of the total Canadian population.
And yet, Quebecers'
contribution to federal revenues is not 24.2%. It is 20.6%. Quebecers thus
receive more than they contribute. Is that fair? Yes, it is completely fair,
because one must take into account that Quebec's contribution to Canada's
GDP is 21.8 %. All in all, Quebec is contributing in accordance with
the size of its economy and receiving in accordance with the size of its
population.
It is true that
these figures would change somewhat if Quebecers were not the only Canadians
to enjoy a special federal income tax abatement under the Canada Health and
Social Transfer. But that abatement affects federal spending in
Quebec to the same extent that it affects Quebecers' contribution to federal
revenues. Without that special abatement, their contribution to
revenues would increase to 21.7%, and their share of spending would increase
to 25.3%. In other words, the surplus of spending over revenues would remain
the same.
Does this mean
that Quebec is a "poor" province, as Mr. Landry regularly claims?
Not at all. It simply means that Quebec is slightly less wealthy than the
Canadian average. The four Atlantic provinces, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and
the three territories enjoy a per-capita surplus of federal
expenditures over revenues that is higher than Quebec's.
Does that mean
that Quebecers receive 24.2% of every item in the federal budget? Obviously
not, no more than Saskatchewanians receive the equivalent of their
population share in federal fisheries and oceans spending! Quebecers receive
much more than their population share of some items in the federal budget
(half of equalization payments, for example), and less of others.
It is not surprising Mr. Landry is focussing on those items where
Quebec's figures are below its population share. It must be noted, however,
that these items represent only 23.9% of total federal spending. Those items
for which Quebec's share is lower than Quebecers' contribution to federal
revenues represent only 4.1% of total federal spending.
Mr.
Landry complains-as did Mr. Bouchard before him, and Mr. Parizeau before
Mr. Bouchard (this is an old story)-that Quebecers' share of federal
research and development spending is not equivalent to their population
share. The latest available data (1997-1998) show that Quebecers receive
21.2% of this spending. But this includes spending undertaken in the
National Capital Region, in research laboratories that, for reasons of
efficiency, have to be located there. All modern governments concentrate
their R&D spending in their capital cities, including the Government of
Quebec. With respect to federal R&D spending outside the National
Capital Region, Quebec's share is 26.8%.
As
for goods and services, Quebec suppliers receive 21.5% of federal spending,
which is roughly the size of the Quebec economy within Canada. Since the
purpose of these expenditures is to ensure the operation of government
rather than to redistribute wealth, it is normal that the regional
distribution of this spending should resemble the regional distribution of
economic activity.
Now
take business subsidies. Quebec businesses get 16.5% of total spending. Mr.
Landry is mistaken in seeing some sort of scandal here. It must be said that
business subsidies are not a large part of the federal budget, only 2.6%.
Part of this spending goes to help farmers who do not have marketing boards,
that is, mostly Western farmers. In fact, most Quebec farmers are helped by
consumers throughout Canada through marketing board quotas, and this kind of
assistance does not appear in the federal budget.
Now,
take spending on national defence. Quebec's share is 17.3%. But these data
include spending abroad, which matters to all Canadians. For spending within
Canada, Quebec's share is 21.5%. Most of the provinces receive, like Quebec,
a share of this spending that is lower than their population share. There is
certainly nothing scandalous about the fact that a significant part of
defence spending is concentrated in Nova Scotia. Did we not fight two world
wars on the Atlantic front?
Mr.
Landry claims that the number of federal civil servants in Quebec is
insufficient. In fact, 23.1% of all federal public servants in Canada work
in Quebec, and that proportion would be even higher if the Quebec government
did not assume some responsibilities (such as police services) that most
other provinces prefer to leave to the federal government.
And
I could go on and on in the same vein. For example, Mr. Landry states that
the Quebec side of the National Capital Region gets only 1% of federal
purchases of goods and services in the region. Such a statement is
completely at odds with reality. The headquarters of many of the
largest federal departments are located on the Quebec side, and 27.6% of
federal public servants in the National Capital Region work in Quebec.
Public servants' salaries are one of the largest components of federal
purchases of goods and services.
2. Quebecers are also Canadians
In
short, Quebec is neither the spoiled child nor the victim of the federation.
It receives its fair share of federal spending as a province somewhat less
wealthy than the Canadian average.
Indeed,
how could it be otherwise? What evil force could make Quebec a victim of
systematic discrimination in Canada? We know the answer of Mr. Landry and
his party: "it is inevitable that the nation that is in control
serve itself first." [translation]
In
their universe, one cannot belong to more than one nation. Since we
Quebecers are part of a nation of our own, we cannot be part of the Canadian
nation. They add that two different nations, united within the same state,
maintain relations only of self-interest, not of solidarity.
Mr.
Landry's universe is a sad one. If we were to accept it, why would
English-speaking Quebecers, or Aboriginals living in Quebec, accept to have
a confident link of solidarity with French-speaking Quebecers? Wouldn't it
be "inevitable" that in Quebec too, "the nation that is
in control serve itself first?" [translation]
Fortunately,
Mr. Landry is wrong. We can have more than one identity. To be at the same
time a Quebecer and a Canadian is not at all a contradiction, but a
wonderful complementarity. In this global world, which increasingly brings
us into contact with people of such varied cultures and backgrounds, it is a
strength to have more than one identity, never a weakness. Identities are
something one should accumulate, never subtract.
Obviously,
Quebec is a nation in the French sense of the word, that is, a collectivity
with its own sense of history and cultural references. But this culture
includes our Canadian dimension, our Canadian identity. It includes all the
aspects of the country that we have built with other Canadians, all the
solidarity that links us to them.
To
renounce our Canadian identity would be to give up a significant part of
what makes us Quebecers. We are coming to realize it more and more and
this awareness strengthens our attachment to the solidarity and the
principle of caring that are the very foundations of the Canadian ideal.
|
