The national government is often though to be the sole sovereign authority of a territory, however, governmental authority is not so often clearly delineated or concentrated. Large, regionalized identity groups within an existing state may call for greater autonomy, or existing states may see unity with another as politically or economically advantageous, either development leading to multiple governmental levels within the same territory. Differentiated models of constitutional organization amongst regional governments and centralized national or super-national structures developed from this tension between autonomy and unity, namely the unitary state, the federation, and the confederate models. Each of these systems seeks to accommodate regionalized …show more content…
There exists an ever-looming threat of Quebec secession, as the province pushes for greater autonomy, recognition as a distinct nation within Canada, and greater representation on the federal level. The federal government’s relationship with Quebec is one that exhibits the “paradox of federalism” as described by Lawrence Anderson in ‘Both Too Much and Too Little: Sources of Federal Instability in Canada’, the simple truth that in federations “federal institutions can prevent secession by satisfying some of the institutional demands of those who might desire more significant decentralization but they also provide institutions to those that might be in conflict with the center that can be used to mobilize for alteration…” He argues that the government of Quebec, due to it’s focus on autonomy and protection of identity, would be the province best equipped to secede with “minimal disruption”. In this, a shortcoming of strong regional autonomies in federations is made apparent: in attempts to accommodate diversity the nationalist regions are granted the institutional framework for secession. A push in the reverse, towards less regional autonomy may have similar results, however. As the federal government moves towards centralization to avoid this paradox, they are perceived as invalidating the terms of the federation, and nationalistic pushes for autonomy still …show more content…
As is evidenced in the UK’s devolved unitary system, the Canadian federation and the European Union, each model aims to protect regional diversity and autonomy within it’s limitations, though the degree to which autonomy is granted creates a natural tension between unity and the desire for subsidiarity and self-determination. In devolution, asymmetrical federalism and the constitutional framework of a confederation there is the ability to manage diversity, discourage secession, and ensure stability, but with each of these comes the danger of divisive encouragement of difference. It is up to the individual governments in question then, how to best manage diversity and unity. As phrased by George Anderson, perhaps “stability can be enhanced if the culture goes beyond mere tolerance of diversity to the active embrace of diversity as part of what defines the country and gives it it's value. Institutional arrangements can hep societies better manage their conflicts, but institutions alone are not enough…” Perhaps the answer to encouraging national unity is not then found in the model, but in the contingencies of identity and
The Meech Lake accord was a set of constitutional amendments that were designed to persuade Quebec Province to accept the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 (Brooks 152). This accord derives its name from the Meech Lake, where these negotiations were held by Mulroney Brian, the Canadian Prime Minister, and the ten premiers of the ten Canadian Provinces (Brooks 211). By the time the Canadian constitution was being implemented, Quebec was the only province that had not consented to it. Somehow, the partition of the constitution in 1982 was carried out without Quebec’s agreement, but it was still bound by the same law. Attempts were made to persuade this province to sign the constitution, which it agreed to do but only after its five demands are fulfilled by the Canadian government. Unfortunately, these demands were not met and this accord failed in 1990, when two provincial premiers failed to approve it. This paper answers the question whether Quebec asked for too much during the Meech Lake Accord negotiations.
Although, Quebec’s population share many similar characteristics amongst one another it is not essential to decide “the people” (Heard, 2013). To be considered a state you must represent all the people in it. Quebec prefers independences for the reason of a commonality
Although Quebec is in Canada, a majority of Quebecers do not identify with the national identity of Canada. Both societies create a sense of identity as well as nationalism (Hiller, 295). Hiller mentions two approaches to assessing Canadian identity; the unitary approach and the segmentalist approach (Hiller, 277). The unitary approach suggests that society consists of people who regardless of their ethnic back ground, identify as belonging to the national society, while the segmentalist approach concentrates on groups and communities that share racial, linguistic, occupational, or cultural similarities (Hiller, 28). While most Anglophones are more unitary or pan-Canadian, Quebec heavily identifies with the segmentalist approach. This dissimilarity of identity perspective may be problematic for the country, at the same time however, it can also be viewed as a struggle where contradictory parties find a way to compromise and reshape Canadian society together (Hiller, 277). Canada’s former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau made it his objective to unite Quebec with the rest of Canada. In 1969 Trudeau’s government implemented Bill C-120, otherwise known as the Official Language act, which made French an...
The Quebec referendum that was held in 1995 was a second round of vote that was meant to give the residents of the Quebec province in Canada the chance to determine whether they wanted to secede from Canada and thus establish Quebec as a sovereign state. Quebec has had a long history of wanting to secede from Canada, considering that it is the Canadian providence that is predominantly inhabited by the French-speaking people, whose political relationship with the rest of the Canadian provinces, mostly inhabited by the English-speaking people has been characterized by conflicting ideologies . Thus, the 1995 referendum was not the first political attempt to have Quebec gain its own independence. The discussion holds that the Quebec 1995 referendum would have had both positive and negative implications. Therefore, this discussion seeks to analyze the political consequences that would have f...
... A successful strategy in the accommodation of national minorities within a liberal democracy could be founded upon mutual trust, recognition and sound financial arrangements. However, a certain degree of tension between central and regional institutions may remain as a constant threat in this complex relationship since they entertain opposing aims. The federal governments determination to protect its territorial integrity, and its will to foster a single national identity among its citizens clashes with Quebec’s wish to be recognized as a separate nation and decide upon its political destiny and to foster its distinct identity (Guibernau pg.72). Moreover, if the ROC and the federal government can come to an agreement on terms that satisfy the majority and an identity that encompasses the heart of a country; Canada will continue to exist with or without Quebec.
Quebec has considered and has gone as far to hold referendums over Separatism (Surette,2014). Separatism is when the province of Quebec separates from the rest of Canada to form its own country. Which would have immense effects on Quebec but also the rest of Canada (Martin, 2014). This report will focus on the root causes and origins of Quebec Separatism, the current state of Quebec Separatism and finally how we as a society can act towards Quebec Separatism. Root Causes and Origin
This paper will prove how regionalism is a prominent feature of Canadian life, and affects the legislative institutions, especially the Senate, electoral system, and party system as well as the agendas of the political parties the most. This paper will examine the influence of regionalism on Canada’s legislative institutions and agendas of political part...
acquired by Great Britain in the Treaty of Paris of 1763. The mass majority of
...ereignty. As mentioned Quebec does not have complete sovereignty and it shares its powers with the federal government (Johnson). Strong words like Johnson's found in the mass media are very significant to issues such as this. As elected representatives the government will not act against the wishes of the majority of citizens. Therefore if the Canadian citizens claim that Native Sovereignty in Canada can not coexist with Canadian sovereignty than it will not.
In the year of 1867 the nation we know as Canada came into being. The Confederation in this year only came about after things had been overcome. Many political and economic pressures were exerted on the colonies and a federal union of the colonies seemed to be the most practical method of dealing with these pressures and conflicts. While Confederation was a solution to many of the problems, it was not a popular one for all the colonies involved. In the Maritime colonies views differed widely on the topic. Some were doubtful, some were pleased, others were annoyed and many were hopeful for a prosperous future.1
For example, in Central Canada, Quebec is so different from the rest of Canada culturally and language wise that for some people staying in Canada’s confederation is intolerable and needs to be separated. Take the 1995 sovereignty referendum as an example, When the votes were in, the no side won by a narrow majority of 50.58 percent, only a 1 percent margin. Even after the victory of the 1995 referendum, it did not solve any of the issues, there’s still unrest and the need to protect Quebec’s language and culture from the rest of Canada. Hence, our differences culturally are not being acknowledged and are causing an uproar of conflicts in Canada’s
The United States Government is beloved to all Americans, in the simple fact that all men are created equal and all men are given equal opportunity, to aspire to achieve success and make their dreams come true. Although the percentage of people who achieve all of their goals in life is fairly small, they have the freedom to chase them and America for the most part is a pretty content place. The “law of the land” that sets the standards for our rights and privileges is the U.S. Constitution.
Quebec is a distinct society within Canada (Darkside). With its own civil code, language, and a single dominant faith (Roman Catholic), French Quebec is defiantly distinctive from the rest of Canada and many Quebecois are fighting to preserve that distinction (Darkside). Francophones of Quebec are fighting not only to preserve this distinction but also to be recognized as an entity separate from Canada with acknowledged cultural differences ranging not only from religion, but from ethnic roots which spread to linguistic differences as well. This desire to preserve their culture is what makes them a politically relevant example of a country pursuing nationalistic causes. We will explore the ethnic and linguistic traits and cultural events that inspire Quebecois nationalism.
A group of states or smaller political units that have agreed to follow a power central government is a confederal system. A confederacy that is composed by the states is often weak or loosely organized. These states have a lot of freedom because the majority of power is given to local governments. The central government has very little power. Examples of a confederal government are Belgium, the former Soviet Union, and Switzerland’s canton system.
Since federalism was introduced as an aspect of Canadian political identity, the country has undergone multiple changes as to how federalism works; in other words, over the decades the federal and provincial governments have not always acted in the same way as they do now. Canada, for example, once experienced quasi-federalism, where the provinces are made subordinate to Ottawa. Currently we are in an era of what has been coined “collaborative federalism”. Essentially, as the title would suggest, it implies that the federal and provincial levels of government work together more closely to enact and make policy changes. Unfortunately, this era of collaborative federalism may be ending sooner rather than later – in the past couple decades, the federal and provincial governments have been known to squabble over any and all policy changes in sectors such as health, the environment and fiscal issues. Generally, one would assume that in a regime employing collaborative federalism there would be a certain amount of collaboration. Lately, it seems as though the only time policy changes can take place the federal government is needed to work unilaterally. One area in which collaborative federalism has been nonexistent and unilateral federalism has prevailed and positively affected policy changes is in the Post-Secondary Education (PSE) sector.