Distinct society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Distinct society (in French la société distincte) was a political neologism especially used during a constitutional debate in Canada, in the second half of the 1980s and in the early 1990s. It refers to the uniqueness of Quebec within Canada, although in what ways is vague and controversial.

Contents

[edit] Origin

The term "distinct society" was invented as a description for Quebec by Quebec Premier Jean Lesage. Quebec was later referred to this way by the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism.[1]

[edit] The Meech Lake Accord

The Meech Lake Accord, proposed (but never enacted) amendments to the Constitution from 1987 to 1990, would have inserted the phrase "distinct society" into the Constitution Act, 1867 as section 2 of that Act (the original section 2 of the Act had already been repealed; currently there still is no section 2). In doing so, the Accord would have recognized the difference of Quebec from the rest of Canada, and perhaps implicitly recognize Quebec's peoplehood. As author Marjorie Bowker wrote, it was primarily a reference to Quebec's "laws, its language and its culture."[2]

The National Assembly of Quebec was then referred to in the Accord as having the power to protect Quebec's distinctiveness.

It is controversial as to whether Quebec can be referred to as a nation, and the use of that word in the official papers of the Accord would have probably doomed its approval in the rest of Canada. However, the "distinct society" euphemism itself seems to have shocked English Canadians, partly leading to the demise of the accord in the other provinces. Some critics, such as the Reform Party of Canada, saw it as granting special status to Quebec, which offended their vision of Canada in which all provinces are equal. Others feared that if the National Assembly was empowered to promote Quebec's distinctiveness, a provincial government might decide Quebec must secede in order to keep its distinctiveness.[2]

Quebec Premier Robert Bourassa of the Parti libéral du Québec was a major advocate of the distinct society clause. He regarded it as granting Quebec powers that were vague and thus within the National Assembly's power to help determine; indeed, what makes Quebec distinct could change in the future, and the distinct society clause would still recognize Quebec's progress.[2] The Prime Minister of Canada, Brian Mulroney of the Conservatives, however, had lower expectations for the legal change it signalled. It was revealed in The Secret Mulroney Tapes that he told Newfoundland Premier Clyde Wells that "distinct society" "means dick."

Constitutional scholar Peter Hogg was also confident the distinct society clause signalled little legal change. As he wrote in 1988, the distinct society clause is "an affirmation of sociological facts with little legal significance." He believed it was merely a reference to the fact that Quebec is the only province where most Canadians speak French rather than English and that Quebec is the only jurisdiction in Canada that practices civil law rather than common law. The only place in the Accord where he saw Quebec's distinct society given real substance was in the other provisions, as Quebec would gain more powers in regard to immigration. In fact, although Quebec is not declared to be distinct elsewhere in the Constitution of Canada, Hogg argued several parts of the Constitution prior to 1987 already indicated Quebec had distinctiveness and the law should reflect this. Canadian federalism itself, as well as some bilingualism in the federal and Quebec governments, and the educational rights that indicated Quebec was distinct in regard to religion (in 1867 it was greatly infuenced by the Roman Catholic Church) were cited as examples. Hence, the only way Hogg saw the distinct society clause as having legal effect would be in how to read the rest of the Constitution, although he found it hard to believe knowing Quebec is distinct would add much. Rather than giving Quebec powers, he thought, the distinct society clause recognizes Quebec already has powers that can promote distinctiveness (e.g. educational powers), and just as before the Meech Lake Accord, the use of these powers, even to protect the distinct society of Quebec, would be limited by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. While the Quebec government could infringe upon a right by saying Quebec's distinctiveness is a sufficient reason to do so under section 1 of the Charter, section 1 would still demand the infringement is minimized.[3]

The Accord also recognized that the distinct society clause did not undermine Canada's multiculturalism (protected under section 27 of the Charter) or Aboriginal community (protected under section 25 of the Charter and other constitutional provisions).[3]

[edit] Charlottetown Accord

The Charlottetown Accord (proposed amendments to the Constitution rejected in 1992) had a so-called "Canada clause" that would have also recognized Quebec as a distinct society. In this Accord, "distinct society" was more clearly defined as including "a French-speaking majority, a unique culture and a civil law tradition", and the Charter was specified as having to be interpreted with this in mind.

[edit] After the Charlottetown Accord

Since the death of the accords, the use of the expression has faded and there has been general use, within Quebec, of the term nation to describe Quebec, its people, and its State. Other euphemisms used mainly by federalist nationalists and federalists outside Quebec are different or unique society. The Calgary Declaration, for example, describes Quebec as "unique". After the 1995 Quebec referendum, the federal government under Jean Chrétien did endorse recognition of Quebec's distinct society.[2] In the Canadian federal election of 1997, then-Conservative leader and Quebecker Jean Charest joked about fellow-Quebecker and political rival Jean Chrétien, saying that "I wouldn't be caught dead living in the same distinct society as Jean Chrétien." [4]

The term is still absent from the Constitution. As a result of the failed accords, most Quebeckers consider it impossible to convince English Canada to compromise on this point, and the amendment formula in the Constitution makes constitutional reform very unlikely. In effect, Quebeckers still hold to the notion of two founding nations (French and English) which entitles each nation to special privileges, a notion which underlies the Constitution Act, 1867, whereas English Canadians have adopted a more pluralist notion of the federation as a melting pot from which arises a "Canadian" identity, regardless of regions or language.

Quebec sovereigntists tend to reject the notion that Quebec is "merely" a "distinct society," arguing instead that Quebec is in fact a nation. Many federalists both in and outside of Quebec who oppose "distinct society" or "nation status" for Quebec tend to argue that Quebec is just as linguistically, ethnically and culturally divisible as Canada. Something which Quebec nationalists tend to disagree with.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Rhonda Lauret Parkinson, "Official Bilingualism in Canada," Mapleleafweb. University of Lethbridge. URL accessed 13 May 2006.
  2. ^ a b c d Brian O'Neal, DISTINCT SOCIETY: ORIGINS, INTERPRETATIONS, IMPLICATIONS Political and Social Affairs Division, December 1995. Library of Parliament. URL accessed 2 February 2006.
  3. ^ a b Peter W. Hogg, Meech Lake Constitutional Accord Annotated. Carswell: 1988.
  4. ^ Larry Zolf, Silly Seasons of Canadian Politics, NewsWorld Online.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/i/s/Distinct_society.html"
In other languages