1664798733 Waiting for results

However, this should go without saying |

Last Tuesday, the National Assembly passed a (further) unanimous resolution to the federal government. It is calling for a formal consultation mechanism to be added to the Broadcasting Act to require the Radio, Television and Telecommunications Commission of Canada (CRTC) to consult Quebec when it adopts a regulation on issues related to cultural specificities.

Posted at 9:00 am

share

It is therefore a legitimate and fairly minimal request: to be consulted. Incidentally, the law requires the CRTC to officially consult minority language communities…but not us.

In a context where Quebec is the main center of French in North America, an affirmative response to this request should be self-evident.

In a context where CRTC decisions affect two different language markets, it should also have been a matter of course to consult with the government that knows the Francophone market best.

In a country that cares about the future of French language and culture, the proposal should not have been necessary: ​​the federal government responsible for telecommunications should have proposed it from the start. But no. We must fight again.

That same week, we learned that the major bosses of Air Canada, CN and other organizations subject to the Official Languages ​​Act would not be required to speak French, as required by the Quebec government. As recently as last year, CN didn’t even have a Francophone on its board, and Air Canada’s CEO was happy to be able to live comfortably in Montreal without speaking French. These scandals were quickly forgotten.

That same week, the federal Liberal Party was torn over another demand from Quebec: respect for the French language charter in the official language law. That demand shocks Liberal MPs more than a scathing Statistics Canada report saying French is in decline across Canada.1

As well as language questions, the National Assembly’s unanswered demands are piling up: new immigration powers, unified tax returns, healthcare funding, actions on Roxham Road, citizenship for Raïf Badawi, appointment of ‘Amira Elghawaby, etc. Quebec unhappy? Doesn’t matter.

Quebec and its aspirations don’t seem to interest the federal government. While these numerous cancellations reflect differing opinions, they also reflect a certain indifference. Even on the language issue, the parameters of which should have been integrated for a long time, we must constantly remind ourselves that we are a minority in Canada, a minority in North America, that Quebec’s culture is part of this diversity that enriches the world, that like other cultures, it is threatened by the American cultural giant and that for us a language is not just a means of communication, but the bearer of a culture that is unique in the world.

When the Quebec Minister of Culture asks that Quebec be consulted by the CRTC on issues affecting Quebec culture, it is the nation of Quebec that is asking for minimal resources to thrive in a world that is ever-growing. We once rightly called for telecoms to be a shared power.

Cultures can disappear. Nations can wither away. If any of them ask about basic tools to secure their future, an affirmative answer should be self-evident, even for Canada.

Simone de Beauvoir said “the most scandalous thing about scandal is that you get used to it”. We’re used to our opinion being ignored by the federal government, but it’s still shameful.

I grew up politically in a Quebec where federalists tried to give Québec a special place in Canada, a place that would allow it to thrive in its own way: asymmetric federalism, founding peoples, cultural sovereignty, equality or independence, separate society etc . Over time something broke and they came to the utter insignificance of Philippe Couillard’s “Being Quebecois is our way of being Canadians”. The Ontarians could have said the same thing. We’re paying the price for that insignificance now, because Canada seems to have bought it.

Parties in the National Assembly who believe that Quebec can thrive within Canada must define what they believe are the conditions for that prosperity. What ideal goals they are pursuing and what minimum goals they need. Also, what means will they use to persuade Canada to adapt to the reality in Quebec? And if the federal government continues to ignore them, what does it propose to Quebec, even while staying within the Canadian framework?

This reflection is necessary to strengthen Quebec again, since its absence suggests that the only option is obliteration.