MINISTER DION HIGHLIGHTS THE INCOMPATIBILITY OF CIVIC NATIONALISM AND SECESSION

SHERBROOKE, QUEBEC, April 5, 2001 – Speaking to law students at the Université de Sherbrooke, the Honourable Stéphane Dion, President of the Privy Council and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, stated that there is no universal argument in favour of Quebec's secession from Canada.

Recalling the highlights of the Michaud affair, Mr. Dion said that there is no indication that Quebecers today are more xenophobic in general than other Canadians. "The problem of which the Michaud affair is a symptom thus stems less from Quebec society than from the project of secession itself."

The Minister stated that it is not Quebec nationalism that cannot be civic, but rather secessionism. "You can find many arguments to convince human beings of all origins to become Quebecers. But you will come up short when it is a matter of convincing them to cease to be Canadians as well."

Mr. Dion noted that it would be difficult to find an issue other than secession that divides Quebecers on an ethnic basis. If the issue of secession, for its part, brings about an ethnic rift, the Minister said he believes it is not because Francophones are xenophobic, or because non-Francophones are insufficiently integrated. "It is because only Francophone Quebecers might think secession would provide them with a country in which they would be the majority. [...] It would give no such status to other Quebecers. This is why the latter are less likely to support this project."

The Minister pointed out that a secessionist claim can be based on universal rights only in the context a colonialist or totalitarian state, which denies civil rights to all or some of its citizens. "It is never the will to separate populations of different languages, cultures or religions that can legitimize secession," stated Mr. Dion. "Justification stems instead from the fact that citizens have good reason to want to break away from a state that does not treat them as citizens." Consequently, "such universal arguments are not available to justify secession in a democratic state. All that remains are particularist arguments linked to an ethnic group." In the case of Quebec, the particularist argument is as follows: "We Francophone Quebecers will become the majority if our country is limited to the boundaries of Quebec, rather than extending to all of Canada."

The Minister then asked the following question: "Must we, Francophone Quebecers, renounce Canada, where we are in the minority, and form a majority within our own country?" Mr. Dion explained that among the reasons that lead him to answer no to that question, the most fundamental is the following: "confident mutual support by different populations within a single democratic state - which in our case is called Canada - is a greater and more valid ideal than the process of rupture which would consist of limiting our state to the territory in which our own ethnic or linguistic group finds itself in the majority."

Mr. Dion emphasized that he is not confronting one nationalism with another, Canadian versus Quebec. He maintained that the two complement each other very well. "Rather, I am confronting the particularist quest for majority status with the universal principle of solidarity among all citizens," he pointed out.

Citing a passage from Camus, "I love my country too much to be a nationalist," the Minister concluded: "For my part, I love Quebec, I love Canada, but it is not so much a nationalist sentiment as a universal principle that attaches me to Canadian unity: I want to keep all of my fellow citizens."