Graduation Address

"Convocation address given by Hon. Jean Lesage, Premier of Québec" (10 October 1963). (UA Case 69, Box 1)

C'est avec un grand sentiment de fierté et de reconnaissance envers l'Université du Nouveau-Brunswick que j'accepte le doctorat d'honneur que vous avez bien voulu me remettre. Je l'accepte comme un témoignage d'amitié envers ma province, le Québec, que je représente ici, et je vous en remercie bien sincèrement.

Every time I pay a visit to New Brunswick, I go back to my province with the impression that I have renewed my contacts with friends who have a great deal in common with my fellow-citizens of Quebec. There are so many points of similarity between the population of New Brunswick and ours, that I feel right at home in talking to you about questions which, we think, are of capital importance. I am certain, therefore, that the people of this province are in a particularly good position to understand our attitude in matters of federalism.

People outside Quebec sometimes wonder what our reasons are for adhering so firmly to the respect for provincial rights in those fields of action that the Constitution of our country put under the jurisdiction of the provinces. They often wonder why we refuse agreements which, to begin with, offer practical and even financial advantages. Nor can they see, more precisely, why we often find it useful to suggest alternatives to federal programmes which, at first sight, are directed towards solving serious problems.

Thus, as all of you will remember, we expressed serious misgivings about the federal programme of aid to the municipalities. As a matter of fact, we did not want to allow the federal government to be in direct relations with the municipal corporations, preferring rather that, in connection with loans from the Federal Bureau, they would deal only through our Department of Municipal Affairs. Still, we know, the federal programme is a weapon in the fight against unemployment, which, in the opinion of certain people, we should have endorsed without hesitation.

A similar phenomenon appeared with the federal project of contributory pensions. In Quebec, we have decided to establish our own provincial, public and universal retirement fund, supported by the building up of reserves; as a result, the federal scheme cannot be put into effect in our province. Here again, several people are wondering on what motives we have based our attitude.

We also have very strong doubts about the pertinence and the keeping up of joint plans. On this subject, and even if we recognize the fact that joint plans have been useful and even necessary in the past, we intend, in the future, to stick more and more to the formula of contracting out. As you know, by means of this formula, the federal government allows the provinces that wish to avail themselves of it the same financial advantages as they would have received had they taken part in such plans. Naturally, it concerns joint plans in those fields of action which fall under provincial jurisdiction.

In short, - and the examples that I have just given prove it - it often happens that Quebec introduces what certain people believe to be a discordant note into the concert of Canadian Confederation. As a matter of fact, we are not always overjoyed with federal schemes which are possibly based on excellent intentions.

I hasten to say at once that the government of the province of Quebec is not the only provincial government that raises objections to some policies of federal origin. I admit however that, because it is positive, our attitude in matters of Federal-Provincial affairs is a very firm one. As the behaviour of a minority is always easier to identify than that of groups that make up an integral part of the majority, our feelings are also known to everyone, which makes them more clearly present in the minds of the other citizens of Canada.

But what is the fundamental basis of our attitude?

We begin, first of all, with two facts that are very easy to acknowledge. The first one is that the French-Canadian group which forms the great majority in our province is, however, only a minority in comparison with the population of the rest of Canada. This minority is obviously important, and has been established in the country for several centuries, which grants it particular rights and particular duties. The fundamental right, which it insists in safeguarding, is the maintenance of its traditions and its cultural characteristics. Its principal duty, as a group of French culture and language, is to spread on the soil of America the human heritage of which it is the guardian, and for which it is responsible. This is why we so often say that from our point of view, Quebec is the mother country of all those who speak French in North America.

Today, the French-Canadian minority is solidly established in our country. There can be no more question of its disappearance. If this was to have happened, it would have happened before now. It must be realized, however, that the historical and political development of our country has not always been favourable to us. But what is important today - as I have said on several occasions - is to assert and spread those values in which we believe; in short, it is to achieve the legitimate aspirations of French Canada. Its survival has been won, but it has not yet succeeded in playing the part that it should in our country.

The second fact to which one must constantly refer in order to understand properly the meaning of our present demands, is that Quebec - the political expression of French Canada - exists and is developing within a given political system. Our people exist in the concrete reality of every day living, and this reality has an influence upon their behaviour and their feelings, as the case would be for any other group of human beings. Now, Canada, of which Quebec is one of the ten provinces, has a federal form of government which guarantees, as I said, to the minority that we are the respect of the rights which I referred to a moment ago.

However, I must say that our present position vis-à-vis the central government is not based only on juridical considerations, far from it. If I mentioned The British North America Act, I did so because I wanted to draw an interpretation from it that should be agreed to by all those people who have some idea of the history of our country.

And what is this interpretation?

According to those of us who live in Quebec, one of the objectives of the federal system, an objective that is implicitly laid down in our Canadian constitution, is to make it possible for ethnic groups to retain, and above all to develop their own characteristics. If this had not been the case, we can be sure that the French Canadians would never have accepted to become part of Confederation in 1867.

In order for it to achieve its purpose, the federal system presupposes an apportionment of powers and responsibilities. Thus, in our country, important fields of action were set aside for the provinces because it was felt, amongst other reasons, that provincial autonomy in these fields would allow the French-speaking group and the English-speaking group to grow in freedom. The fact that other provinces came into Confederation later changes nothing of its original aims. And as I have just said, the French Canadians of 1867 saw, in this guarantee of provincial autonomy, the satisfaction of one of their prime demands.

All this explains why today we object so strenuously every time we consider that the central government is entering into spheres of activity which, in our opinion, come under provincial jurisdiction. In tendencies such as these, Quebec sees a great danger of gradually losing some of the guarantees which it insists should remain in the federal system that it accepted to live in, in 1867.

Le Québec craint qu'ainsi on finisse, en quelque sorte, par changer les règles du jeu de façon unilatérale. Et alors nous nous trouverions dans une situation qui n'était pas prévu en 1867, et qui n'est pas acceptable à l'heure actuelle.

Pour cette raison, nous devons exercer une vigilance constante. Personne au Québec ne croit qu’une mesure donnée, - l’aide aux municipalités, le programme de retraite contributoire, ou l’aide fédérale à l’éducation, par exemple - peut, à elle seule, conduire le Canada français à l’assimilation à la majorité de langue anglaise. Personne ne croit non plus qu’une de ces mesures soit de nature, à elle seule, à menacer notre héritage culturel tout entire. Cependant, nous devons nous opposer systématiquement à toute initiative fédérale, quelle qu’elle soit, qui réduit, en fait, le champ de la jurisdiction provinciale ou y porte atteinte. Nous ne pouvons absolument pas, même lorsqu’il s’agit de questions d’apparence secondaire, demeurer passifs devant des initiatives fédérales que nous jugeons nuisibles à l’exercice des pouvoirs confiés aux provinces. En effet, c’est l’ensemble de ces mesures qu’il importe de considérer et c’est à toutes et chacune de celles qui constituent cet ensemble que nous devons nous opposer, parce que chacune d’entre elles comporte un accroc à l’autonomie des provinces, accroc qui constitue un précédent qu’on a tendance à invoquer par la suite pour justifier d’autres accrocs de plus en plus étendus.

En somme, nous ne défendons pas le principe de l’autonomie des provinces seulement parce qu’il s’agit d’un principe, mais bien plus parce que l’autonomie est pour nous la condition concrète non pas de notre survivance qui est désormais assurée, mais de notre affirmation comme peuple. Notre attitude est gouvernée par les conditions de la réalité dans laquelle nous vivons et non par une prise de position théorique et abstraite.

You are perhaps wondering why Quebec is taking such a firm attitude at the present time. You are perhaps wondering about the rapid development that is taking place in our province these days! I would like, in closing, to try and give you an answer to these questions.

For the last few years, Quebec has been becoming aware of what it is and especially of what it can become. Its desire to assert itself is stronger than ever, and it needs to exercise all the powers that the Constitution of our country has granted to it. From this fact, and because of the reasons that I mentioned a moment ago, Quebec is much more sensitive to any federal activity in our own fields of action.

There is also another reason for our particularly firm attitude. We feel that the provinces can make an important contribution to the solution of present problems, for example in matters of regional development. The success of such an undertaking rests, however, on the decentralizing of powers and on the possibility of the provincial governments being able to dispose of sufficient financial resources. Without such resources, the use of those powers which come under provincial authority becomes illusory: constitutionally, the provinces can take action, but, in fact, they find themselves incapable of carrying out their obligations. Under these conditions, it is difficult for the provinces to emerge from the passive position into which they are being led by the present apportionment of fiscal resources.

The Quebec of today refuses to accept this passivity. We are too realistic to think that we can do everything, but we believe that true respect for the legitimate autonomy of the provinces, and everything connected with it, calls for them to have at their disposal all the indispensable levers, so that they may take efficient action in those fields which come under their jurisdiction.

In Canada, this essential condition for the success of provincial undertakings that have become necessary because of the size of the task that must be accomplished, has not yet been satisfied. Federalism, as we understand it, requires however that this be done. Other provinces worry about this just as much as we do.

The solution of this problem is one of our aims. We are putting all our efforts into it, and we are doing this even more enthusiastically and vigorously because we are convinced of the eventual success of our efforts.