Canadian unity has never been so challenged. Alberta will hold a non-binding independence referendum this October, which could lead to a formal independence referendum soon afterward. Nearly one in three people in Saskatchewan are considering separation, according to an Ipsos poll. And Quebec may be poised to elect the Parti Québécois this fall with the understanding that the party would hold another independence referendum.
While support for secession has not yet reached majority levels in any province, it appears to be growing. Even if referendums are held on the issue and independence proponents don’t win, the movements won’t go away because the factors making them give up on the federation remain unchanged. It will just be a matter of time before the issue bubbles to the surface again.
It may be time to go down the road that few Canadians want to travel again.
It’s time to start talking about reopening the Canadian Constitution.
Those old enough to have lived through what felt like interminable constitutional discussions over the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords likely won’t be eager to start the process again. The efforts to revise the Constitution dominated the Canadian political landscape for years and were ultimately unsuccessful. With over 30 years having passed since the last attempts at constitutional reform, Canada has a new generation who may be energized to take on the task again.
Canada’s unity issues aren’t caused by parties or policies. The problem is systemic. Provinces are perpetually butting up against the federal government on economic and cultural issues, and when those disputes happen, support for secession heats up. If the cycle of clashes and frustration is to end, the system must be changed.
In the West, Canada’s imbalance of political representation has long been a point of contention. The Senate offers the most egregious example of the regional inequity. While the maritime provinces have a cumulative population of 2.14 million people, they have 24 senators. Alberta’s population is over 5 million people, yet the province has only six senators. Although the Senate was never intended to have representation by population, the disproportionate leaning of power to the East is unreasonable. Or at least, it feels unreasonable to Westerners.
The anti-democratic nature of the appointment of senators is a point of contention, too. Senators are appointed by the prime minister (or selected by the prime minister and appointed by the governor general as a formality) and typically as a reward for partisan service rather than to serve as local representatives. Every party in power does this, and while some senators take the role seriously, many have been mailing it in for the sake of a good paycheque. Having to periodically face the electorate would inspire better performance from senators.
On the economic front, the West is most upset about equalization. It doesn’t seem to matter how much economic activity Quebec may generate or how badly the energy-based economy in Alberta may periodically crash, Alberta still never collects equalization and Quebec never stops drawing from it.
Reforming the Senate and fixing the equalization system would defuse much of the dissatisfaction in the West. To do either of those things, though, the Constitution must be amended.
In Quebec, grievances with the federation are predominantly cultural and linguistic. Many economic and political concessions are offered to Quebec in hopes of keeping secessionist sentiment at bay, but the movement remains solid. As with Western Canada, Quebec must see systemic changes if we want to see longer-term stability and for secessionism to move to the back burner.
Quebec wants to enshrine its distinct status in the Constitution. A parliamentary motion in the House of Commons in 2006 was passed stating “That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada.” The motion was embraced by many within Quebec, but it was still only a symbolic gesture. It was non-binding and didn’t confer any protections or rights for the province.
One of the key points Quebec wanted within the amendments proposed in the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords was the entrenchment of what people referred to as the “distinct society” clause in the Constitution. It wouldn’t offer any extra legislative authority to the province but would affirm Quebec’s unique cultural status within Canada. If such a clause were to become entrenched in the Constitution today, it would temper secessionism in Quebec.
There are risks to opening the Constitution, though. Changing the document is an onerous process and requires a national consensus, which may be impossible to attain. When the Charlottetown Accord failed, along with the proffered distinct society status for Quebec, it led to a growth in secessionist sentiment and the near victory for the independence movement in the 1995 referendum. Another failed constitutional venture could shatter the nation it’s trying to unify.
Canada’s Constitution is failing to hold the nation together, and it must be reformed. Otherwise, the country will continue with regional squabbling until eventually a province secedes. Whether the country has the will and ability to amend the Constitution is another question. But the time to start talking about it is now.
