An English Quebecer’s View Of The Quebec Referendum BY DARREN BECKER or some, the upcoming Pos referendum is seen as one of the most pivotal moments in recent Canadian his- tory. On October 30th, as Quebecers file into their respective voting booths, they will be asked to vote either Yes or No in answer to the Parti-Quebecois’ proposed question on sovereignty; two sim- ple words, which will eventually decide the fate of an entire nation. The rest of Canada will wait with trepidation as the bal- lots are counted, all the while having no input into an issue that threatens to tear a hole in the very foundation of their country. After endless years of political rambling and constitutional debate, Quebecers will finally be able to decide on their collective future. As an Anglophone, born and raised in Montreal, I have been exposed to Quebec culture all of my life. While most of my friends have decided to leave the city and pursue their lives elsewhere, I have chosen to stay. Being an English speaking Quebecer grow- ing up in a predominately French milieu was not the great tribula- tion that some may think it to be. I often feel fortunate that I have had the opportunity of being exposed to two different lan- guages and cultures. Contrary to some Canadians’ perspective, Montrealers are not engaged in ongoing linguistic conflicts. Anglophones and Francophones have learned to live together rather amicably. St- Laurent Boulevard may stand as the unofficial great divide between what Canadian author Hugh Mclennan called “The Two Solitudes”, but it is more of a symbolic border than one of con- crete significance. It would be more accurate to say that, for the most part, there is a laissez-faire attitude at work which allows the two communities to work and live together in a harmonious environ- ment. As in many socio-political entities, Quebec has its own group of political radicals who try to stir up controversy and attempt to throw matters into a state of dis- array. Therefore, when the PQ states that the French language is being threatened by “the sur- rounding sea of English culture,” they do little to allay any pre- existing hostility. The government's xenophobic gibberish does nothing to improve Quebec’s crumbling economic state. If anything, it can only throw the province into a state of further disarray. Countless studies have been presented which clearly show that separation will have profoundly negative effects on Quebec’s infrastructure, yet the PQ insists on pushing ahead with its plan. Before the Parti-Quebecois was elected in 1976, Montreal had a flourishing and vibrant English community. When the PQ came to power, the city saw a massive exodus of its Anglophone popula- tion. As a result, Montreal lost its status as the hub of Canada’s eco- nomic sector. Now, the city finds itself going through major finan- cial woes. Taxes are skyrocketing, hospitals are closing all over the island, and parts of Ste. Catherine Street, Montreal’s main thorough- fare, resemble a ghost town. It is almost impossible to fathom how Quebecers can honestly believe that separation is a viable solution to their problems. Acceptez-vous que le Québec devienne souverain, apres avoir offert formellement au Canada un nouveau partenariat économique et politique, dans le cadre du projet de loi sur l'avenir du Québec et de l'entente signée le 12 juin 1995? Oui ou Non? Since September of last year the PQ has not governed at all, remaining entirely fixated on sep- aration while running the province into the ground in the process. They have spent millions of taxpayers’ dollars on sover- eignty commissions, studies, and advertising, while more pressing issues such as social assistance programs and unemployment have been swept aside. Ironically, they have created a self-fulfilling prophecy, inadvertently using their own political ineptitude as proof of Quebec’s stagnation as a result of its inclusion in the Canadian union. In 1980, when the last referen- dum took place, I was not yet old enough to grasp the meaning of the event. Fifteen years later,it still isn’t any any clearer. Mr. Parizeau’s sovereignty proposal seems to be entirely spurious. All around the world countries are joining together, forming econom- ic unions and partnerships, not isolating themselves with out of date ideas of cultural and linguis- tic protectionism. Quebec has done extremely well for itself in the 128 years since confederation. It is part of a country that consistently ranks as one of the best places in the world to live. It has formed its own dis- tinct linguistic and cultural insti- tutions, and has given rise to powerful corporations such as Hydro-Quebec. No one will ever deny the fact that Quebec is a predominately French-speaking entity which, like all other provinces, has several unique social characteristics. However, one has to ask whether these fac- tors alone are strong enough of an impetus to sever ties with the rest of the country. While Montreal may currently be going through economic hard- ships, it nonetheless remains a vibrant, multicultural city which would never be the same without the unique flavours that each community brings to it. It is a product of the contributions made by several ethnic and linguistic groups, not just the Francophones and Anglophones. A vote in favour of separation would severe- ly jeopardize this situation by seemingly sending the message that the French culture is some- étre différents Sao how more significant then any of the others. Montreal could never and would never be the same. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum on October 31st, after all of the smoke has cleared, it will be hard to say who has won and lost. A vote against sovereign- ty would keep the nation together, but there are no guarantees that Mr. Parizeau and Mr. Bouchard would simply pack up their bags and ride into the great Canadian sunset. The two politicians are simply too tenacious to abdicate their cause that easily. As a result, Canadians may find themselves being dragged through a whole new series of constitutional debates. If Quebec does opt for sovereignty, there can be no telling what the consequences will be. The nationalist fervor seen in Quebec could spread very rapidly throughout the country. Other provinces could declare their dis- satisfaction with the Federalist arrangement and demand separa- tion as well. Like the Francophone, Anglophone and multi-ethnic communities in Montreal, Quebec and Canada have prospered because they have worked togeth- er, using their combined strengths to formulate a practical and suc- cessful partnership. Quebec needs Canada and Canada needs Quebec. Some have argued that Canada will continue to grow and prosper without “La Belle Province”. Throwing themselves into the unknown may be the only way for Quebecers to find out just how good they had things before. Perhaps only then will they realize that in this day and age, it takes more then a language and “dis- tinct” culture to effectively formu- late a county. “@ —Darren Becker is a journalism student at Concordia University, Montreal. Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new Economic and Political Partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995? Novemper 1995 / Emiy 9 The Parti-Québecois' referendum campaign motto translates as ‘We have the right to be different.’ The ballot that could change the future. photos: Jonathan Lander Oui ou Non? An English Quebecer’s View Of The Quebec Referendum Fé some, the upcoming ‘Quebec referendum is seen as one of the most pivotal ‘moments in recent Canadian his- tory. On October 30th, as ‘Quebecers file into their respective voting booths, they will be asked to vote either Yes or No in answer to the Parti-Quebecois' proposed question on sovereignty; two sim- ple words, which will eventually decide the fate of an entice nation. The rest of Canada wil wait with trepidation as the bal- lots are counted, all the while having no input into an issue that threatens to tear a hole in the very foundation of their country. ‘After endless years of political rambling and constitutional debate, Quebecers will finally be able to decide on their collective future ‘As an Anglophone, born and raised in Montreal, I have been ‘exposed to Quebec culture all of iy life, While most of my fiends have decided to leave the city and pursue their lives esewhe have chosen to stay. Being an English speaking Quebecer grow- {ng up ina predominately French milieu was not the great tribula- tion that some may think it to be often feel fortunate that I have had the opportunity of being ‘exposed to two different an- guages and cultures Contrary to some Canadians perspective, Montrealers are not ‘engaged in ongoing linguistic ‘conflicts. Anglophones and Francophones have learned to live together rather amicably. St- Laurent Boulevard may stand as the unofficial grat divide between what Canadian author Hugh Mclennan called “The Two Solitudes", but itis more of a symbolic border than one of con- cance. It would be to say that, for the ‘most part, there i a laissez-faire attitude at work which allows the ‘wo communities to work and live together in a harmonious environ- {As in many socio-political entities, Quebec has its own group of political radials who try to stir lp controversy and attempt to throw matters into state of dis- array. Therefore, when the PQ States that the French language is being threatened by “the sur- rounding sea of English culture," they do litle to allay any pre existing hostility ‘The government's xenophobic gibberish does nothing to improve ‘Quebec's crumbling economic state. If anything, it can only throw the province into a state of further disarray. Countess studies have been presented which clearly show that separation will have profoundly negative effects on Quebec's infrastructure, yet the PO Insists on pushing ahead with its plan Before the Parti-Quebecois was lected in 1976, Montreal had a flourishing and vibrant English ‘community. When the PQ came to power the city saw a massive exodus of tion, Asa res status as the hub of Canada's eco- rnomie sector. Now, the city finds itself going through major finan- cial woes. Taxes are skyrocketing, hospitals are closing all over the Island, and parts of Ste. Catherine Street, Montreal's main thorough fare, resemble a ghost town. Itis almost impossible to fathom how (Quebecers can honestly believe that separation isa viable solution to their problems. Since September of last year the PQ has not governed at all, remaining entirely fixated on sep- aration while running the province into the ground in the process. They have spent m of taxpayers’ dollars on sover- nty commissions, studies, and advertising, while more pressing Issues such as socal assistance programs and unemployment hhave been swept aside. Ironically, they have created a self-fulfilling prophecy, inadvertently usi their own political ineptitude as proof of Quebec's stagnation as a result ofits inclusion in the Canadian union In 1980, when the last referen- dum took place, I was not yet old ‘enough to grasp the meaning of the event. Fifteen years laterit still sn't any any clearer. Me Parizeau's sovereignty proposal seems to be entirely spurious. All around the world countries are Joining together, forming econom- ‘ie unions and partnerships, not Isolating themselves with out of. date ideas of cultural and linguis- tic protectionism. Quebec as done extremely ‘well for itself in the 128 years since confederation. Itis part of a ‘country that consistently ranks as ‘one ofthe best places in the world to lve. It has formed its own dis tinct linguistic and cultura int tutions, and has given rise to powerful corporations such as Hydro-Quebec. No one will ever deny the fact that Quebec is a predominately French-speaking entity which, lke all other provinces, has several unique social characteristics. However, fone has to ask whether these fac~ tors alone are strong enough of an impetus to sever tes withthe rest ofthe country. While Montreal may currently bee going through economic hard= ships, it nonetheless remains a vibrant, multicultural city which ‘would never be the same without the unique flavours that each ‘community brings to it. Its a product of the contributions made by several ethnic and linguistic ‘roups, not just the Francophones Novae 1995.) Ban 9 and Anglophones. A vote in favour of separation would severe- ly jeopardize this situation by seemingly sending the message thatthe French culture is some= meat antec fered hhow more significant then any of the others. Montreal could never and would never be the same. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum on October 31s afterall of the smoke has cleared, it will be hard to say who has won and lost. A vote against sovereign= ty would Keep the nation together, but there are no guarantees that Mr, Parizeau and Mr. Bouchard would simply pack up their bags and ride into the great Canadian sunset. The two politicians are simply too tenacious to abdicate ther cause that easly. Asa result, Canadians may find themselves being dragged through a whole new series of constitutional debates. If Quebec does opt for sovereignty, there can be no telling what the consequences will bo. The nationalist fervor seen in ‘Quebec could spread very rapidly throughout the country. Other provinces could declare their dis- satisfaction with the Federalist arrangement and demand separa- tion as well, Like the Francophone, Anglophone and multi-ethnic communities in Montreal, Quebec and Canada have prospered because they have worked togeth- fusing their combined strengths to formulate a practical and suc- cessful partnership. Quebec needs Canada and Canada needs Quebec Some have argued that Canada il continue to grow and prosper without *La Belle Province’ Throwing themselves into the ‘unknown may be the only way for ‘Quebecers to ind out just how ‘ood they had things before Perhaps only then will they realize that day and age, it takes ‘more then a language and “dis- tinct” culture to effectively formu Tate a county. “® —Darren Becker is a journalism student at Concordia University Montreal ‘avionno souveran, aprés avoir ‘offer formolement gu Canada un ouveau partenariat économique tt potique, danse cadre du projet ‘e'ol sur favent du Qusboc et do Fentontesignéo le 12 juin 1995? ‘@ new Economic and Poltcal Partnership, within the scope ofthe Billrespectin the futuro of Québec and of the agreement signed on Sune 12, 1995? etal tos onge the tare