A central issue in Canadian political discourse since before the founding of the nation has been responses to varying elements of Québec Nationalism. From the Québec Act (1774) to the Official Languages Act (1969) and the Constitution Act (1982), there have been near endless attempts to either combat, or appease Sovereigntist elements in Québec. One of the major responses, Asymmetrical Federalism, works in Canada largely to give Québec greater political and legal space to exist as a nation within Canada, primarily as a result of historical trends of separatism or strong nationalist sentiment. Political responses - both in policy as well as in campaign messaging - to this ever-present nationalism have historically varied, and in the upcoming
…show more content…
Further, it will argue that the aggressive and dismissive treatment of legitimate political question of separation by both the Liberals and Conservatives can only lead to increasing separatist sentiment, and that the NDP have the clearest and most advantageous policy position in response to Québec nationalism.
The three major political parties in Canada going into the 2015 election are all Federalist. The Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats (NDP) all believe in the concept of a Québec nation that exists within Canada. This common agreement among popular political parties is encouraging, as Québec separation would be both economically and politically disastrous for the province and for Canada. In an article challenging the economic justification for Québec separation, Earl Fry argued that the significant economic burdens of transferred federal …show more content…
This has been the reality with the Liberals and the Conservatives, (and some of their precursor parties, excluding the Reform) who have both endorsed not allowing Québec to separate with a “simple majority” or 50%+1 of the popular vote in a referendum vote on separation. Not only that, the Liberals have been accused of being responsible for the confusing language of the initial referendum that has been cited as a major contributor to Québecois ire levied at Anglo-Canada following the 1995 referendum. This opposition to the right for Québecers to self-determine on matters of importance is an essential question of democratic legitimacy. What Québecers have been told repeatably by the two most historically popular Federalist parties, is that their autonomy and choice is ultimately illegitimate. This attitude only serves to increase support in Québec for separation, because if the rest of Canada does not at the very least allow Québecers to answer fundamental questions about the structure of power under which they consent to live under, than anger at the anglo-political elite of the country will reach a boiling point. The only way to unify the two ‘solitudes’ of English and French Canada is to be willing to extend the olive branch of respect for
Further, it will argue that the aggressive and dismissive treatment of legitimate political question of separation by both the Liberals and Conservatives can only lead to increasing separatist sentiment, and that the NDP have the clearest and most advantageous policy position in response to Québec nationalism.
The three major political parties in Canada going into the 2015 election are all Federalist. The Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats (NDP) all believe in the concept of a Québec nation that exists within Canada. This common agreement among popular political parties is encouraging, as Québec separation would be both economically and politically disastrous for the province and for Canada. In an article challenging the economic justification for Québec separation, Earl Fry argued that the significant economic burdens of transferred federal …show more content…
This has been the reality with the Liberals and the Conservatives, (and some of their precursor parties, excluding the Reform) who have both endorsed not allowing Québec to separate with a “simple majority” or 50%+1 of the popular vote in a referendum vote on separation. Not only that, the Liberals have been accused of being responsible for the confusing language of the initial referendum that has been cited as a major contributor to Québecois ire levied at Anglo-Canada following the 1995 referendum. This opposition to the right for Québecers to self-determine on matters of importance is an essential question of democratic legitimacy. What Québecers have been told repeatably by the two most historically popular Federalist parties, is that their autonomy and choice is ultimately illegitimate. This attitude only serves to increase support in Québec for separation, because if the rest of Canada does not at the very least allow Québecers to answer fundamental questions about the structure of power under which they consent to live under, than anger at the anglo-political elite of the country will reach a boiling point. The only way to unify the two ‘solitudes’ of English and French Canada is to be willing to extend the olive branch of respect for