"Towards a Better Canada"

Notes for an address at Dalhousie University

Halifax, Nova Scotia

January 30, 1997

Canada is not an ordinary country facing ordinary circumstances. Canada is a great federation that is in danger of collapse. We cannot afford to be ostriches, burying our heads in the sand and ignoring the events that have unfolded, and are still unfolding, in Quebec. That is why I am going to speak to you frankly and openly about the state of our federation and the need for national reconciliation. Canadians have built a great and fair country -- and together we can have an even brighter future.

For an academic who is now in politics, it is a pleasure to be here at one of Canada's most prestigious law schools. Your school has produced many great political figures over the years: from Prime Minister R. B. Bennett to premiers such as Allan Blakeney, and the late Angus L. Macdonald, Richard Hatfield and Joe Ghiz. This institution has also educated over half the members of Nova Scotia's federal Liberal Caucus, including Health Minister David Dingwall, Halifax MP Mary Clancy and Halifax West MP Geoff Regan. Graduates from Dal Law are also valuable players on my national unity team at the Privy Council Office. And I have not been in partisan politics long enough to forget former Conservative Prime Ministers Brian Mulroney and Joe Clark, who also studied here.

As some of you will know, I originally intended to speak to you last September, but in the end had to cancel, because our government was announcing the decision to refer certain key questions concerning the legality of a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) to the Supreme Court.

I entered politics to fight against secession, and your province knows a thing or two about secessionists. But even though, as you know, Joseph Howe brought a petition about Nova Scotia's wish to secede from Confederation to London in 1868, the British Parliament refused to accept it since it did not come from the Canadian Parliament, and, fortunately, your province has stayed in Canada and become a proud and active participant in our federation. As for Mr. Howe, he had a change of heart and became one of my predecessors as President of the Privy Council. Perhaps Mr. Bouchard should take note.

Although I hope to infuse my speech today with the flavours of Nova Scotia, I will be touching upon ideas I have expressed from coast to coast -- whether in Lethbridge on October 18, in Quebec City on October 19, or in Toronto on January 27. Canada is a vast and very diverse country, yet as Canadians we face some common challenges.

Of course we have problems; it would be foolish to pretend that we don't. There is too much unemployment, and too much poverty, especially among our children. But in spite of the challenges we face, the Canadian federation works well and we can be proud of it. We stack up pretty well against other industrialized countries. We don't need data from the United Nations to know how fortunate we are to have our quality of life, and that it would be difficult to find a country that could match it. When friends from other countries visit us they are always impressed by the peaceful lives we lead, the care we take to preserve our immense and beautiful natural spaces, our openness and respect for diversity and the dynamism of our cities. We have a great federation -- but there's always room for improvement.  Today, I want to talk about the challenge of maintaining the unity of our country. To do so, we must improve our federation and overcome the unfortunate misunderstanding that exists about the recognition of Quebec's place in Canada.

MAINTAINING AND IMPROVING SERVICES TO CANADIANS

Too often, our federal-provincial debates focus on symbolic abstractions, rather than on the daily realities faced by Canadians from Victoria to Cape Spear. But what the debate is really all about is envisioning the best way to provide services to living, breathing citizens. And making Canadians -- including Quebecers -- aware of how our federation is evolving to be more responsive to the needs and aspirations of its citizens is an important step in promoting national unity.

We must see our federation as much more than a power struggle between different governments. I am sure you have read, as I have, many articles that wax eloquent about the division of federal and provincial responsibilities only in terms of who gets what, without ever devoting one paragraph, one sentence, one line to the aspect of service to the public. And yet, it is Canadians' health, safety and welfare that are at stake.

What we need are strong provinces, a strong federal government and a strong relationship between them. In deciding our future, we do not have to choose between creating ten self-centred republics or an omnipotent federal government. Rather, we must build our future together on the solid foundation provided by a healthy and united federation.

We need a balance between solidarity, our commitment to mutual assistance, and subsidiarity, keeping government close to the people. Let's look at the case of Nova Scotia. Like my province, Quebec, Nova Scotia is presently a "have-not" province. Nova Scotia and Quebec are rightly able to benefit from the sharing of wealth that has been part of the Canadian tradition for decades. In the 1930s, for example, Alberta benefitted from transfers from other provinces. Now, Alberta's enviable economic situation allows it to help those provinces which are presently less well-off, such as yours and mine. That is how the Canadian family works -- we help each other out. That is our spirit of solidarity.

Yet, at the same time, the Canadian federation allows Nova Scotia and the other provinces to maintain their own perspectives and approach the challenges they face in their own way. A few years back, each of Canada's ten provinces had budget deficits; now, each of them has found its own way to resolve that situation, and seven have balanced their budgets or are showing a surplus. The achievements of Premier Savage's Liberal government in this regard mean that fiscal year 1996-97 will be the first time in a quarter century that your province will have a totally balanced budget. The methods used in Nova Scotia were not those chosen by Alberta, which has in turn followed a very different route from that on which Quebec is embarking. All provinces are able to capitalize on their own strengths, and they can also turn these strengths toward the common good. Canada helps the provinces strike a balance between innovation through autonomy and mutual assistance through solidarity.

This balance between subsidiarity and solidarity should inform our approach to providing services to the public, so that we do so in a way that ensures equality while respecting diversity. Let's consider the following example. The federal government makes equalization payments to some provinces and not to others. This does not make the provinces unequal: instead, it ensures that all citizens receive comparable services no matter where they live in Canada. While all citizens are equal, governments must respond to their diversity of needs and circumstances.

Equality of treatment must not be confused with uniformity of treatment. When this happens, public service tumbles into mediocrity. The Greek mythical figure Procrustes forced his victims to lie on one of two beds -- a long one, which he stretched them to fit, or a short one, which he made them fit into by sawing off their legs. We wouldn't want Procrustes designing our hospital beds! And yet that is exactly what we are asking for when we insist equality should mean uniformity.

That confusion often arises when people discuss recognizing Quebec's linguistic and cultural difference as a fundamental characteristic of Canada. Some people are afraid that if the provinces are not seen as uniform -- if they don't all conform to the same Procrustean bed -- then they will no longer be equal. But recognizing Quebec's uniqueness would not undermine the equality of provinces or of citizens.

In fact, it would be in line with the principle we have applied in other areas, such as labour market training. We are introducing a new partnership in this sector which will see the federal government continuing to deliver Employment Insurance benefits and maintain various national aspects of the system, but the provinces being given the opportunity to manage approximately $2 billion worth of active employment assistance measures. This will mean that Canadians, wherever they live, will continue to receive comparable services, but tailored by their provincial governments to respond to regional needs. Basic equality of service, but not uniformity of service.

To ensure the best possible services for Canadians, we also need the provinces to work with one another. In this respect, the Atlantic provinces provide some useful examples. The Atlantic Provinces Education Foundation is working to establish a common core curriculum in both official languages, as well as common assessment strategies, including Education Indicators for Atlantic Canada, the first regional indicators report in Canada. Meanwhile, the Atlantic Canada On-Line project, begun in 1996, will make government data more accessible, facilitating citizens' interactions with their governments. These initiatives show how public policy cooperation and coordination can lead to improved services for Canadians.

To improve our services to the public, then, we don't have to criticize Canada's basic foundations, we have to build on its strengths. One of those strengths is our social programs, and it is these I would like to discuss in more detail.

No single province could have developed all the dimensions of Canada's health and social system within its own borders, with its own resources. Yet together we have been able to build a web of programs which contribute greatly to a quality of life that is almost unequalled in the world.

In a speech last October, Premier Savage talked about how Canadians believe that "we must maintain social bonds, like medicare, which Canadians recognize as national family traits -- as entitlements of citizenship and unifying features of our country." Prime Minister Chrétien, Health Minister David Dingwall and the Liberal government in Ottawa are committed to upholding these social bonds and the five principles of medicare: universality, accessibility, comprehensiveness, portability and public administration. These principles reflect our national solidarity, and are important for ensuring comparable and equitable services for each and every Canadian throughout the country.

For those who carp about the costs, I would point out that an efficient health and social system is also a sound economic investment. A private, American-style health system would place tremendous costs on businesses, making them less competitive. In fact, U.S. car makers spend more on health insurance than they do on steel. Our health system sharpens our competitive edge, and partly explains why Canada, which represents 6.8 per cent of the North American automobile market, accounts for 15.8 per cent of automobile production.

Incidentally, federal intervention in the health sector entails minimal administrative costs, contrary to what is too often suggested. There is a myth that Health Canada employs 8,000 people whose only task is to monitor the provinces and duplicate their activities. In fact, in fiscal year 1996-97 Health Canada has only 6,400 employees in all. So, how many of them do you think are responsible for enforcing the backbone of our medicare system, the Canada Health Act?

- Do I hear 6,000? 3,000? 1,000? 500? 100? Not even close! The actual figure, ladies and gentlemen, is 23!

The rest of Health Canada's employees deal with responsibilities that logically fall under federal jurisdiction, such as Aboriginal health services, drug regulation, and prevention of epidemics. After all, it would make no sense to require drug companies to have the results of their clinical trials approved by 10 governments!

We are committed to striking the right balance between solidarity and subsidiarity. To this end, we fully support examining more consensus-driven, effective mechanisms with the provinces, to modernize our social union and ensure equitable access for all Canadians wherever they live to the services to which they are entitled. A joint federal-provincial committee has been struck to that effect, co-chaired by Minister Pierre Pettigrew and Alberta's Stockwell Day. Its priorities include finding new joint approaches to the scourge of child poverty and to addressing the issues of disabled Canadians.

With regard to the latter, a task force headed by Andy Scott, MP for Fredericton-York-Sunbury, has produced the important report "Equal Citizenship for Canadians with Disabilities: The will to act." As the report suggests, it can "be used as a compass so that governments and the community set the course and move in the right direction" to ensure that Canadians with disabilities can enjoy full and equal participation in the life of our country.

By working together, with mutual respect and a commitment to Canadians, the federal and provincial governments can make sure our health and social system is sustainable for the future. We can keep a flexible and dynamic social union to position us well for the next millennium.

QUEBEC & CANADA

You know, if all Canadians focused on the benefits of the services we enjoy because of this federation, I am sure that nobody would be discussing breaking it up. However, at present, maintaining national unity is a challenge we must face.

I want my fellow Quebecers who are thinking about voting YES in any future referendum to be aware of the weight upon their shoulders. They must realize that voting YES will mean renouncing Canada. Voting YES will mean seeking to impose their choice on their fellow Quebecers and on all Canadians. And voting YES will mean seeking to impose their choice on their children and their grandchildren. I want all these things to be clear.

Unfortunately, in the event of another referendum, the Quebec government would undoubtedly be motivated once again not by the need for clarity, but by the need for a winning question. But the Quebec government must remember that they owe it to Quebecers and to other Canadians to ensure that there is no confusion about the question or about the implications of secession.

If we are prepared to say that we can't keep Quebecers against their will, we should surely also have a right to ensure clarity when the votes are cast. If it is fair to say that Nova Scotians can't keep Quebecers in Confederation against their will, clearly and democratically expressed, it is also fair to say Nova Scotians, like other Canadians, have the right to be certain that the process is clear, mutually acceptable and fair to all. After all, the secession of Quebec would have grave consequences for Nova Scotians and citizens of the other Atlantic provinces, since it would cut you off from the rest of the federation. For all these reasons, our government took the decision to refer certain key questions concerning secession to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The secessionist leadership talks about a unilateral declaration of independence -- or UDI -- as if it were a perfectly normal step to take. But in point of fact, a UDI as envisaged by Premier Bouchard would not be acceptable in any democracy in the world. Indeed, there are many countries where secession of any type isn't an option under the Constitution. This is the case in France, in Norway, in South Africa and in Spain, for example. We in Canada are, in fact, unusually democratic in considering the possibility that our country could be divided.

But we can avoid secession, and the heartache it would bring, by working towards national reconciliation. It is part of my job to show Quebecers the advantages of staying in the Canadian family, but I would like the people here today in the audience, the people of Dalhousie University and of Nova Scotia, to show them too.

Each of you here today can make this country stronger and more united. One of your fellow students, Graham Murray, has put his efforts into the "Unity Link" website on the Internet. This site is fostering an increased understanding of the true benefits of Canada. Thank you Graham, on behalf of all Canadians.

I found browsing Unity Link stimulating. It is by no means a cheerleader for the federal government. But I can understand why Canadians are feeling nervous. As Unity Link points out, the only issue on which history will judge us is whether Canada continues to exist -- in fifty years' time, current federal fiscal policy will largely be forgotten. And make no mistake, history will judge us all. That is why national unity is not just an issue for governments. Governments alone cannot solve it -- the strong and spontaneous involvement of Canadians is also necessary.

I am a frank person, and I appreciate the frank contributions of others to the unity debate. You know, it is not popular to say in Quebec that there must be clarity about secession, and that secession cannot take place in confusion. But I will continue to make this point because I did not enter politics to win short-term popularity. And outside Quebec, it is not always popular to stress the need for recognizing Quebec as a distinct society. But I will continue to push for recognition of Quebec's distinctiveness, because it would be a great thing for Canadian unity, and a great Canadian thing to do.

To explain why Quebecers want this recognition, I'd like to invite you to perform an exercise of the imagination. Imagine that Nova Scotia is the only majority English-speaking province in a continent of 300 million Francophones. That French is globally the predominant language for business, media and the Internet. Imagine that most Canadian members of Parliament and bureaucrats do not speak your language. Now you are beginning to understand how many Francophone Quebecers feel. Wouldn't you, in this situation, want some recognition that you had the warm support of other Canadians for preserving your language and heritage?

Canadians know that equality does not require uniformity. Furthermore, recognizing Quebec's distinctiveness would not mean giving the Quebec government extra powers or cash. The positive role that Atlantic premiers have played as spokespersons for recognizing Quebec's uniqueness has impressed me deeply.

I am speaking to you as a Quebecer and a Canadian who is very attached to both his identities. The vast majority of Quebecers feel as I do -- they are proud of both identities. What we, as a government, must do, is to show Quebecers that they do not have to choose between the two identities they cherish. We must show them to what extent the Quebec identity and the Canadian identity complement each other. And we'd like your support in doing this.

CONCLUSION

As I said in my introductory remarks, Canada is a federation that works well and that we can be proud of. We must all work to keep our country together. And we must do so not just for ourselves and our children, but also for the many other people elsewhere who look to Canada as a source of hope. Many of them can only dream of the advantages we enjoy -- and perhaps even take for granted -- as part of the Canadian federal system. Even a cursory glance at the world today reveals how many states and regions are riven by ethnic and religious conflicts. Surely Canada, which has been blessed with so many advantages, should continue to show the world a model of harmonious cohabitation.

Moreover, working together we can make Canada an even better place to live. We can build on our social and economic successes to create a federation which is even more responsive to the needs, hopes and dreams of its citizens. That is the vision of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Speaking about the renewal process, Mr. Chrétien said that "our federation should be responsive to our common needs and diversity. It should show respect for each other and our institutions. It should involve partnership and dialogue between our governments and citizens."

Today I am pleased to be taking part in a dialogue with Nova Scotians, and with the students and faculty of Dalhousie Law School. I am very interested to hear your perspectives. Working together, we can rise to the challenge of improving our federation and keeping the Canadian family united. Together, we can make Canada even better.

Check against delivery.

Return to regular web page:
http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/aia/default.asp?Language=E&Page=pressroom&Sub=Speeches&Doc=19970130_e.htm