Relations between Quebec and the Canadian French-speaking community for the year 2000 and beyond

"RELATIONS BETWEEN QUEBEC AND THE CANADIAN
FRENCH-RELATIONS BETWEEN QUEBEC AND
THE CANADIAN FRENCH-SPEAKING COMMUNITY
FOR THE YEAR 2000 AND BEYOND"

NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS AT A SYMPOSIUM
AT A SYMPOSIUN ON THE ESTATES-GENERAL
IF FRENCH CANADA AFTER 30 YEARS

UNIVERSTY OF OTTAWA

NOVEMBER 8, 1997

Ms. Bureau, Mr. Leblanc, Mr. Brassard, Mr. Brien, Ms. Lanteigne, colleagues from the House of Commons - I see at least two: Mr. Bélanger, Mr. Ménard - colleagues from the University - I see a number of familiar faces and it's nice to see you again - representatives of the press, ladies and gentlemen, when the organizers of this symposium were kind enough to invite me, I must admit that when they talked about the Estates-General, it made me think more of the French Revolution than the Quiet Revolution. Mr. Brien said he was too young, Ms. Lanteigne said it reminded her of 1967, Expo year - for me as well, I was 12 years old, it was Expo year - and so I called Vincent Lemieux, and I asked him, what does that make you think of, the Estates-General of French Canada? So he said, listen, I especially remember that your father had really insisted that John Trent do his doctoral thesis on it, but he never completed it. So the conclusion is that, if there are some empty seats here today, it's John Trent's fault.

Now, we're told that it was a time of rupture between Francophones in the other regions of Canada and Francophones in Quebec. Mr. Leblanc has quoted an extraordinarily categorical statement by Ms. Bissonnette in that regard, but I must tell you that it's not true, that Francophone Quebecers don't want to break with the Francophones in the other provinces and feel a strong solidarity with them. One proof of this is that, among Francophone Quebecers, those who advocate Quebec independence immediately feel uncomfortable when people talk to them about that topic, and try to give themselves a clear conscience, either by claiming that the cause of French is done for outside Quebec, or by saying that the withdrawal of Canada's Francophone province would not weaken Francophones outside Quebec, a theory that is so preposterous that one has to wonder whether those who defend it really believe in it themselves or are merely trying yet again to give themselves a clear conscience.

Because there really is solidarity between Quebecers and other Francophones in Canada, you were right to call this round table "Relations between Quebec and the Canadian French-speaking community for the year 2000 and beyond", and that's what I'm going to talk about, by trying to identify the similarities and differences between the situation of Francophones living in Quebec and Francophones living elsewhere in Canada. From there, we can perhaps identify trends for the next century.

So, what are the similarities in the situation of Francophones in Quebec and other Francophones in Canada? First of all, there is the global context, which is the same for all us Francophones. The French language is a prestigious international language, but it is in decline. We talked today about the debate on the situation in Vietnam, the country that is hosting the Francophonie and that has legislation, that has laws that prohibit the use of French. So it is clear that French is in decline.

Moreover, we live in a world where, for the first time in human history, the number of languages in the world is decreasing rather than increasing. The forces of assimilation are increased tenfold by modern means of communication. We also live in a world where a language other than French is by far the most used in international exchanges, the modern Esperanto, the Esperanto of business, the Esperanto of science, culture and the Internet. And that language is also the dominant language on our continent, the English language. It is also the first time in human history that a quasi-continent, North America without Mexico, is so unilingual. But we're talking about the very language that is predominant in the world.

And so this is the situation all of us are in, as Francophones in Canada, whether we live in Quebec or elsewhere. So the challenge we've had in this century, that of thriving in French, will be the challenge we have in the next century. It is a sizeable challenge for us, because we know full well that language is much more than a means of communication. Language is an opening on a whole cultural universe, a way of life, and that language thus characterizes us profoundly.

To help us take on this challenge together, we, Francophones in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada, share two assets. The first asset is that we are more educated than before. It is an observable fact that when one has more education, one is more attached to one's language, one is more motivated to pass it on to one's children.

This is a very important change that we must use to our advantage, in particular to ensure that we master modern means of communication, rather than making them into Trojan horses for our assimilation. On the contrary, the Internet, for example, can break the isolation of communities and ensure that all Francophones have much more direct means of communication.

While Canada is a world leader for the use of French on the Internet, only 3% of communications on the Internet are in French, and one third of that comes from Canada. That's because the governments of Canada and Quebec, and also the Government of New Brunswick, have a responsibility in this field, which is to promote French in new means of modern communication. Other governments need to get involved as well.

The second asset is the rise of the liberal values of openness and pluralism. Linguistic pluralism is increasingly seen as a strength, as something to be promoted, rather than a problem, something to be eliminated. It is difficult to measure the extent to which this is a new phenomenon. To quote the linguist Jacques Leclerc:

"The centralizing authoritarianism which consists of unilaterally imposing a single language throughout a territory and ignoring linguistic pluralism [...] was standard practice in the 19th century."

For various countries, entry into the modern era has been accompanied by active policies of assimilation, including public schooling.

If Canada is seen in international comparisons as one of the most tolerant countries, the most open to the world, it is certainly because Francophones and Anglophones have had to learn to live together.

And thus, a majority of our Anglophone fellow citizens, in poll after poll, support official-language policies that would have been unthinkable at the time of Confederation or in Wilfrid Laurier's day. And so the French language has made a breakthrough over the past thirty years into the common institutions of this federation and its rights have been considerably strengthened, both in legislation and in the Constitution. One need only compare the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Constitution Act, 1982 to see the extent to which the rights of the French language have been strengthened. And so immersion schools are a phenomenon that is here to stay, and the new generation of Canadians is the most bilingual in our history, and all that progress, while not enough, to be sure, which must still be pursued much more, is undeniable and unparalleled in the world.

So our bilingualism, our openness to two international languages, is more and more an economic asset. The statistics speak for themselves: it pays to be bilingual in Canada and it pays for Canada to be bilingual in the world. I will quote Jean Laponce, one of the greatest world specialists on linguistic policy:

"The predominance of the English and French languages puts Canada in a privileged position among the industrialized democratic nations that are at the very heart of the global communications system."

Francophones living outside Quebec are a threefold minority. They are a minority within their continent, within their country and within their province or territory. They live with Anglophone fellow citizens who are a threefold majority: within their continent, within their country and within their province or territory.

But as Mr. Leblanc has said, those communities are rising to that challenge. There are difficulties. We must not paint a rosy picture, there is assimilation, but nor must we artificially inflate the rates of assimilation. Those communities have the capacity to use a network of institutions that is unparalleled in comparison with what previously existed, and there is thus a way for them to look to the future with confidence, despite the tremendous challenges they must grapple with.

The situation in Quebec is a unique context. Both linguistic communities must accept that they are each both a majority and a minority, and that is what makes the unique character of Quebec society, a character that is perhaps unique in the world. The Anglophones are a majority within their continent and their country but a minority within Quebec, and the Francophones are a majority within their province but a minority within their country and on the continent. Anglophones therefore accept, and must accept more and more, that Francophones have a right to linguistic protection against English. Such irreproachable democracies as Belgium or Switzerland have much more stringent policies of territorial unilingualism than there are in Quebec or in Canada as a whole.

The Francophones, for their part, accept and must accept more and more that, even though Quebec Anglophones are a majority within the continent, they are not living in an abstract continent; they live in the Gaspé, in the Eastern Townships, in the Montreal region, and, as minorities, they have rights as well.

That balance to be struck between Francophones and Anglophones is unique. Are they capable, Quebec Francophones and Anglophones, of striking that balance? Of course they are, and they will be able to bring about greater and greater harmony, I am sure, while respecting the Quebec and Canadian charters. Nevertheless, the danger of secession, the secession debate is greatly hurting their harmony and their ability to find agreement. If you want to find the surest way to divide Quebecers, ask them to renounce Canada. If you want to strengthen their solidarity among themselves, ask them to keep their solidarity with all Canadians, including French-Canadians in the other provinces.

In conclusion, those who are asking us to renounce Canada to be Quebecers cannot see the century we are entering. It will be the century of plural identity. Mobilizing Quebec and all of Canada in support of the French-speaking community will be essential for the cause of French in the world. In the same way, at a more individual level, being at the same time Quebecer, Francophone, French-Canadian and Canadian will be more than ever a remarkable complementarity, which we must preserve for ourselves and for our children.

Check against delivery

Return to regular web page:
http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/aia/default.asp?Language=E&Page=pressroom&Sub=Speeches&Doc=19971108_e.htm