Latest news with #QuietRevolution
Toronto Star
4 days ago
- Politics
- Toronto Star
Alberta has something to learn from some unexpected opponents to provincial separatism
If there's one piece of advice I find myself giving more and more these days, it's that progress is not linear — it's spiralic. In each generation, we find ourselves revisiting issues we thought were long-ago resolved. The lesson to draw from this is not that things are hopeless and we can never 'win.' Instead, we should draw strength from our cyclical struggles — we aren't in this alone, and it's not all on our shoulders. We step into a long interconnected chain of those who came before, and those who will come after, all of us working for a better world. It can be useful to revisit similar moments of struggle to put current events into context. The United Conservative Party's sly flirtation with fringe separatist factions within Alberta is not rooted in the same historical, cultural, and political conditions of Québec — but Indigenous resistance to these movements has in fact remained stable and consistent. Take these two quotes, nearly 30 years and thousands of kilometres apart. 'Our Treaties are sacred covenants and are to last forever. Alberta did not exist when our ancestors agreed to share the land with the Crown. The province has no authority to supersede or interfere with our Treaties, even indirectly by passing the buck to a 'citizen' referendum.' Chief Sheldon Sunshine, Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation & Chief Billy-Joe Tuccaro, Mikisew Cree First Nation, 2025. 'A unilateral declaration of independence by the government of Québec would undemocratically change or terminate our relationship with the government, Parliament, and people of Canada. [It] would attack our fundamental right as a people to determine our own political future; it would constitute fundamental breach and repudiation of the terms of the James Bay and Northern Agreement of 1975; and it would be in violation of fundamental principles of democracy, consent and human rights.' Matthew Coon Come, former Grand Chief of the Crees of Eeyou Istchee, 1996. Let me take you back to 1995. Québec had just a few months previously elected the Parti Québécois, whose mandate was to hold a referendum on independence during its first year in office. This was the culmination of centuries of sustained effort that began to peak during the Quiet Revolution in the 1960s before coming to a head in 1980 with Québec's first unsuccessful referendum on the matter. True to their promise, October 30th saw Québeckers turn out in historic numbers to vote. The rest of Canada held its collective breath. But just a week before and unbeknownst to most Canadians, an equally momentous mobilization played out in the vast northern portion of the province as the Cree nation held a referendum of its own. At no point during any of the political organizing around separation, were the opinions sought, or rights considered, of the eleven Indigenous nations that have Québec's borders scrawled across their territories. A reckless move when just 20 years before, Québec's massive James Bay hydro project was ground to a halt by the determination of a relatively small population of Indigenous people. That mobilization resulted in the James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement, considered Canada's first modern treaty. Encompassing 1,061,900 square kilometres of land — 68.8 per cent of the entire province — the agreement was made between the federal and provincial governments, and the Cree, Inuit and Naskapi nations. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW But how to reach the Cree citizens? October is the middle of the hunting season in Eeyou Istchee — Cree territory in northern Québec. From September until spring, the communities emptied out, and families trekked across land to spots unconnected by any road or telephone service. The conditions were less than ideal to launch a response to Québec's bid to pull itself out of Confederation. John Henry Wapachee and Robbie Dick knew they had to pull out all the stops. They chartered three helicopters to visit more than 100 bush camps to reach families on the land and spread the word. Other Cree travelled hundreds of kilometres through wintery conditions back to their fly-in communities, to gather at polling stations, schools and meeting halls. Cree living outside Eeyou Istchee made their way to stations set up in Montréal, Val d'Or, Ottawa, North Bay, and Senneterre. The question posed? 'Do you consent, as a people, that the Government of Quebec separate the James Bay Crees and Cree traditional territory from Canada in the event of a Yes vote in the Quebec referendum?' The answer was 96.3 per cent against. Eeyou Istchee would not be following Québec if it managed to become independent and good luck to whomever had to redraw that map. This Cree referendum made international news at the time, though in my research I haven't come across much evidence that the Parti Québécois acknowledged the outcome or that it swayed the final vote — and it very well may have had no impact on the vote itself. Nonetheless, Cree opposition to secession would have severely impacted the ability of Québec to follow through with independence had they been successful. The Cree weren't the only ones to speak out. Farther north in Nunavik, Inuit held a separate referendum, voting 96 per cent against Quebec separation. A Parliamentary research paper published in 1996 found that provincially, 95 per cent of Indigenous people who participated in the Québec referendum voted no. Chiefs in Québec and the Assembly of First Nations Grand Chief Ovide Mercredi were also very vocal in their resistance to 'the forcible inclusion of aboriginal people in a new, independent state, arguing that it would be contrary to international law.' ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW Nor has sentiment shifted. In 2014, the Parti Québécois once again sought a mandate to bring a third sovereignty referendum forward. Grand Chief Michael Delisle of Kahnawake responded plainly: 'We'd never be part of Quebec or cede out of Canada because we don't believe we are Canadians to begin with. Our ties are to the land.' Just two weeks ago in front of the Legislature in Edmonton, Treaty First Nations in Alberta voiced similar sentiments. Those who gathered were united in opposition to talks of separation, which Confederacy of Treaty 6 First Nations Grand Chief Greg Desjarlais characterized as a 'violation of Treaty, natural law and the land itself.' Those few Albertan separatists who flat-out ignore Indigenous treaty rights seem to think that Indigenous nations are their natural allies — after all, don't we all chafe under the oppression of the federal government? The answer is provincial governments have a host of wrongs to answer for. I would remind Albertans that Alberta's Sterilization Act was in effect from 1928 to 1972 and specifically targeted Indigenous women. any of the institutions that have been repeatedly found by Canadian inquiries, inquests, reports and commissions to be motivated by systemic racism against Indigenous Peoples are provincial — not federal. But that's not even the point. Most disturbing to me is the recent resurgence of harmful stereotypes about Indigenous Peoples in public discourse as a method of ignoring treaty rights. Racist and dehumanizing comments once more flood social media claiming Indigenous people are freeloaders who contribute nothing, pay no taxes, get everything for free, or were flat out conquered and thus can have no rights worth discussing. I've spent the last ten years writing against these stereotypes and trying to debunk myths, only to see the same tired narratives being operationalized to justify a new wave of colonial land theft. Our communities are exhausted trying to assert Indigenous humanity — and if our dehumanization is necessary to this separatist movement, then let's bring that into the light and be honest about it. The real issue, the one that First Nations and Métis within the province have been very clear in articulating, is what it has always been: our lands are not yours to take. Alberta is covered by five treaties: 4, 6, 7, 8, and 10 (though treaties 4 and 10 have no First Nations communities within this province's borders). Portions of Alberta are also within the Métis Nation's Homelands. It isn't some sort of loyalty to Parliament that holds Indigenous nations to these constitutionally recognized agreements — but as Chief Delisle put it nearly a decade ago, Indigenous Peoples are tied to the land. Alberta does not have the ability nor the right to alter that relationship through secession — the only right Alberta has to its existence at all is because of that relationship. If Albertans are serious about working together with Indigenous Peoples to improve the treaty relationship, it cannot happen under the threat of separation. Whatever political points the UCP hopes to gain by encouraging a doomed movement, even as it issues statements denying involvement, the damage being done to relationality in this province cannot be worth it. Albertans need to reaffirm their commitment to being treaty peoples by educating themselves and shutting down this kind of foolishness. In the end, no matter what happens, the answer from Indigenous Nations to separation on terms other than our own? It remains a resounding 'no.'
Hamilton Spectator
25-05-2025
- Sport
- Hamilton Spectator
Quebec government names Montreal Canadiens great Maurice Richard a ‘historic figure'
MONTREAL - The Quebec government has named legendary Montreal Canadiens goal scorer Maurice Richard as a historic figure. Quebec Culture Minister Mathieu Lacombe announced the designation alongside members of Richard's family at a ceremony today at the Bell Centre. The government defines a historic figure as a person who is now deceased who played a role in the province's history. Richard dominated the NHL beginning in 1940s, when he became the first player to score 50 goals in 50 games. The legend of the player known as the Rocket was also intertwined with the identity and struggle of French-speaking Quebecers, and he is seen as a catalyst for the Quiet Revolution. The frenzy over Richard reached its peak in March 1955 when fans angered over a three-game suspension to their star smashed windows and overturned cars in downtown Montreal in an event now known as the Richard riot. Tensions only calmed after the star player himself got on the radio to plead for calm. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 25, 2025.
Winnipeg Free Press
25-05-2025
- Sport
- Winnipeg Free Press
Quebec government names Montreal Canadiens great Maurice Richard a ‘historic figure'
MONTREAL – The Quebec government has named legendary Montreal Canadiens goal scorer Maurice Richard as a historic figure. Quebec Culture Minister Mathieu Lacombe announced the designation alongside members of Richard's family at a ceremony today at the Bell Centre. The government defines a historic figure as a person who is now deceased who played a role in the province's history. Richard dominated the NHL beginning in 1940s, when he became the first player to score 50 goals in 50 games. The legend of the player known as the Rocket was also intertwined with the identity and struggle of French-speaking Quebecers, and he is seen as a catalyst for the Quiet Revolution. The frenzy over Richard reached its peak in March 1955 when fans angered over a three-game suspension to their star smashed windows and overturned cars in downtown Montreal in an event now known as the Richard riot. Thursdays Keep up to date on sports with Mike McIntyre's weekly newsletter. Tensions only calmed after the star player himself got on the radio to plead for calm. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 25, 2025.
Montreal Gazette
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Montreal Gazette
Opinion: Quebec's selective secularism reveals contradictions
Op Eds For decades, a widespread narrative has suggested that Quebec has distanced itself, even divorced itself, from religion. This belief stems largely from the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s, when the provincial government under Premier Jean Lesage moved to limit the influence of the Catholic Church, particularly in education and health care. In doing so, it ushered in an era of civil governance. But has Quebec truly cut ties with religion, or has it simply redefined the relationship? Despite this political shift, Quebec remains deeply infused with religious heritage, especially Catholicism. The province's flag, adopted in 1948, features a white cross and four fleur-de-lis , symbols tied to Christian and Marian iconography. Even Quebec's national holiday, St-Jean-Baptiste Day, retains its religious name, reflecting its origins in Catholic tradition. More than 2,000 churches continue to dot the landscape in Quebec. Many towns, streets and neighbourhoods are named after saints. Numerous schools and educational institutions still carry religious names and symbols, and most Quebecers continue to celebrate holidays such as Christmas, Easter and even Valentine's Day, all rooted in Christian traditions. For decades, religious symbols like crucifixes adorned public spaces including schools, hospitals, public libraries and even the National Assembly. While some of these have been removed under newer secular laws like Bill 21, many remain. In fact, their continued presence is often justified as part of Quebec's 'cultural heritage' rather than its religious life, a subtle but telling distinction. The recent death of Pope Francis further demonstrated religion's enduring role in Quebec society. French-language media outlets dedicated extensive coverage, broadcasting the funeral live and airing public reactions. Many Quebecers expressed deep sorrow and regard for the Pope as a vital spiritual figure. Churches across the province held memorial services and special prayers, a testament to the Pope's symbolic weight in Quebec's collective consciousness. The Quiet Revolution was not an outright rejection of Christianity or religious belief. Rather, it was a struggle over social and cultural authority. At the time, the Catholic Church wielded extensive power in Quebec society. The revolution marked a shift from clerical control to a more civic model, a redistribution of power from clergy to laypeople. It did not result in bans on religious practice; instead, religious presence remained strong in daily life, even as its official role diminished. Today, secularism is often presented as a pillar of Quebec identity. French sociologist Jean Baubérot identifies three core principles of secularism: separation of religion and state; freedom of belief; and equal treatment of all religions. Yet, in practice, secularism for some politicians in Quebec is not always neutral. Catholic symbols are often preserved as 'cultural artifacts,' while visible expressions of segments of Quebec society, such as the hijab, turban or kippah, are restricted in the name of neutrality. This inconsistency highlights the inherent contradictions in the selective enforcement of 'secularism,' reflecting deeper sociopolitical anxieties surrounding identity, integration and cultural diversity. Religious commitment, rituals and manifestation vary across communities and individuals. But the evidence is clear: Quebec has not cut itself off from religion. Rather, it has reframed religion, especially Catholicism, as part of its cultural DNA. The symbols, traditions and rituals remain, even if their roles have shifted. Exclusionary political agendas have, at various points, sought to reshape Quebec's identity, but they stand at odds with the province's deeper values. Quebec's true strength lies in its enduring commitment to fairness, mutual respect, openness and the inclusion of all its communities. With the next provincial election on the horizon, the opportunity arises to reframe the conversation around unity and cohesion. It is time for all segments and communities of Quebec society to stand together and face the province's most pressing challenges, be they political, social, economic, educational or in the health system. Only through collaboration and a shared vision can Quebec move forward and address the profound issues that threaten the well-being of all Quebecers.
Montreal Gazette
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Montreal Gazette
Opinion: Papal proceedings captivate ‘secular' Quebec
Op Eds A rare moment of international communion. That's how a friend of mine — although far from being a practising Christian — poetically described the scene on Thursday as millions of Catholics around the world held their breath, watching white smoke rise from a small chimney in Rome on TV screens at home and at work. A new pope had been chosen. And here we all were, anxiously waiting to learn which cardinal had been elected by the conclave to lead a church with which many Quebecers, still today, have a complicated relationship. For over three centuries, the Catholic Church dominated Quebec society. It dictated public policy, controlled institutions such as health care and education, and even influenced election results. Its impact has left an indelible mark on our culture, social behaviour and laws — an influence still felt today, at least to some extent. And while the church brought positive contributions to many areas of society, it also left deep, lasting scars. For decades, Indigenous children had their rights stripped away in residential schools; orphans and students were physically and sexually abused by priests and nuns; patients in psychiatric hospitals endured barbaric experimental treatments under the clergy's watch; homosexuals were rejected and persecuted simply because of who they loved; and women were denied autonomy over their own bodies — just to name a few examples. That's why, during the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s, after centuries of control by an all-powerful church, Quebecers suddenly and collectively decided to take back their lives and cast religion aside. Or did we, really? Today, Quebec proudly defines itself as a secular society. The CAQ government even reinforced the separation of church and state a few years ago with Bill 21, which bans government employees in positions of authority from wearing religious symbols during work hours. And yet, here we are again, watching fervently as the media provide around-the-clock coverage of a new pope's election. Correspondents are sent to the Vatican; experts analyze every word, gesture and symbol as Leo XIV steps onto the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica; and questions such as 'how do popes choose their new name?' are answered. It is sometimes striking how Quebecers — especially francophones — react when it comes to the Catholic Church. On one hand, we reject its influence; on the other, communities rally to save their local churches, calling them integral to our heritage and social fabric. Many remain deeply affected by the church's darker legacy, and yet still wish to preserve its remnants in our physical and cultural landscape. We no longer care about church doctrine, and yet tens of thousands gathered in Quebec City during the 2022 visit of the late Pope Francis. Even in our National Assembly, a crucifix remained above the Speaker's throne until 2019 — a relic from the 1930s symbolizing the church's supremacy over civil law. Its removal was contested by some who claimed it as cultural heritage. Today, it rests inside a glass display case in the assembly, like a museum piece to be cherished and celebrated. People in the rest of Canada often ask: 'What does Quebec want?' When it comes to religion, this week's events have once again shown how torn Quebecers are, caught between honouring their Catholic roots and confronting their painful past. So, are we truly a secular society, or is it only when it suits us? Pretty much like the deliberations of the conclave that just took place, the mystery remains. Raphaël Melançon is a public affairs consultant and political analyst. He previously worked as a journalist and political adviser at all three levels of government. This story was originally published May 9, 2025 at 2:21 PM.
