Ottawa forum asks: What kind of unity does Canada seek? (06/09/96)

Ottawa forum asks: What kind of unity does Canada seek?

by Nikolai Bilaniuk

OTTAWA - What is the role of non-English, non-French Canadians in the in the debate over Canada's future, and in the Canadian polity in general?

The forum "What Kind of Unity? What Kind of Separatism?" held on March 26 at Ottawa City Hall under the auspices of the National Council of Ethnic Canadian Business and Professional Associations (NCECBPA), gave the public the opportunity to hear answers from representatives of all of Canada's major political parties.

Prof. Seymour Wilson of Carleton University moderated the panel, which included five federal politicians: Maria Minna of the Liberal Party (substituting for Secretary of State for Multiculturalism Hedy Fry), Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Quebecois (BQ), Jim Abbott of the Reform Party, Simon de Jong of the New Democratic Party (NDP) and Progressive Conservative (PC) Sen. Consiglio de Nino. The panelists' opening statements were followed by questions from designated representatives of the ethnic communities and, finally, by questions from the floor.

Ms. Minna led off by noting that the Multiculturalism Act proclaims diversity as a fundamental aspect of Canadian society, and that society should strive for acceptance and respect for everyone, not merely tolerance. "Tolerance is not good enough," she said, "after all, other than the aboriginals, everyone is an immigrant."

On a more practical level, Ms. Minna maintained that Canada benefits from the presence of allophones (those whose mother tongue is neither English nor French) because they can facilitate Canada's trade with the rest of the world.

Ms. Minna pointed out that separatism in Quebec has bred hostility to multiculturalism and that statements such as, "We are a people," by separatist Parti Quebecois (PQ) politicians worry allophones.

The BQ's Mr. Duceppe countered that the Quebecois notion of sovereignty is geographically and not ethnically based. And yet, he proclaimed that Quebec defines itself as a French society, that this common language is a cement, and that new immigrants to Quebec have difficulty understanding its history.

Mr. Duceppe said Quebec society consists of four components, 1) the Quebec (French) nation, the majority; 2) the English minority; 3) the aboriginals, who, he went to some pains to point out, fare better in Quebec than elsewhere; and 4) cultural communities who came individually and have to integrate into Quebec society.

Reform's Jim Abbott felt obliged to pre-emptively counter accusations that his party is racist as a prelude to stating its policy, which is that official government-sponsored multiculturalism harms national unity because it puts the state in the position of policy-maker in the cultural arena, where he believes it does not belong.

Mr. Abbott emphasized that his party's opposition to official multiculturalism does not mean that Reform is opposed to multiculturalism practiced by individuals. On the contrary, he agreed that Canadian society gains strength and insight from the diversity of its citizenry.

NDP Heritage critic Simon de Jong emphasized the contrast between Canada and other places. He said his family came to Canada to escape the consequences of war in Europe. Canada accepted them, to the point of letting him, a foreign-born citizen, represent his fellows in Parliament.

Canada, Mr. de Jong said, is not a melting pot like the U.S., but a country that allows a celebration of differences. In his view, the thinking of the Reform Party and Bloc Quebecois emphasizes "preserving," while the NDP's emphases "becoming."

Mr. de Jong used the metaphor of an hourglass to show that the flow of jurisdiction is now away from the nation-state to supranational bodies like the European Union and to local communities, therefore, Canada's debates about nationalism, English vs. French, is predicated on 19th century notions.

In the view of Sen. de Nino, Canada is the only country that has embraced the idea that everyone may come and build a new country. He opposed self-identification on the basis of "ethnic" or "multicultural" communities, saying that these communities marginalize themselves.

Sen. de Nino said he doesn't like the notion of "two founding nations," feeling that this leaves out everyone else. He also added that non-English/French Canadians have the potential to be a formidable force, but have been relatively passive so far.

Questions from the floor

Questions about the eventuality of a separate Quebec prompted an economic discussion, which had little to do with the concerns of the audience. The BQ's Mr. Duceppe said Quebec welcome cooperation with Canada in supranational structures, and participation in the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Reform's Mr. Abbott opined that if separation did happen, attempts by the rest of Canada to punish Quebec would harm the rest of the country, and therefore cooperation would be wise. He added that in the event of separation, the world's investors would continue to place capital in Canada and Quebec, but at a premium.

Mr. Duceppe was then confronted with the negative consequences of last autumn's separation referendum, such as the desecration of a number of shrines (including two Ukrainian churches and a synagogue). In response, he cited a B'nai B'rith report suggesting that Quebec has the lowest rate of racist incidents of any province.

Mr. Duceppe was then asked what steps the PQ was taking to take advantage of diversity, but he sidestepped the question, saying only that the demographics of Montreal (where much of the province's English-speaking and allophone population is concentrated) make it a "special case."

The discussion then veered back to examinations of Canadian identity. Apparently taking her cue from Sen. de Nino's earlier remarks, an audience member from Quebec made an impassioned plea for the notion that all immigrant cultures are founding cultures, and that, by not acknowledging this, we are creating divisiveness.

This was an idea that Ms. Minna embraced. She said she did not support the Meech Lake accord (an attempt by then Prime Minister Brian Mulroney to persuade the predominantly French-speaking province of Quebec to ratify the 1981 patriation and amendment of Canada's Constitution) because it described English and French as fundamental characteristics of the country. Ms. Minna said, "there are not two founding nations. We all contributed and paid for it."

A questioner from the floor pointed out that the U.S. functions without any official culture or language, and asked whether this places America closer to the multicultural ideal than Canada.

Mr. Abbott answered with an unequivocal "Yes." Ms. Minna insisted that "the U.S.A. is a country that doesn't acknowledge what it is, but we do. You cannot melt people."

| Home Page |