“We were conquered people, our hearts set on surviving in some small way on a continent that had become Anglo-Saxon.” — Rene Levesque.The 1980 Quebec referendum was a moment in Canadian history that I deeply regret..The province-wide referendum took place on May 20, and the proposal to pursue secession was defeated by a 59.56 percent to 40.44 percent margin..A second referendum on sovereignty, which was held in 1995, also rejected pursuing secession, albeit by a much smaller margin (50.58% to 49.42%)..Under Rene Levesque, a Québécois politician and journalist who served as premier of Quebec from 1976 to 1985, the province seemed destined to leave. And it put the fear of God into English Canada..Like many other Canadians, at the time I thought it was important that Canada stay together. And what likely turned the tide, was Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s famous “Elliott” speech..According to the Montreal Gazette, it was the defining moment of the first Quebec referendum, and one of the greatest political speeches in modern Canadian history..It began when Levesque made a mistake — he gave Trudeau the ammo he needed..He was quoted as saying Trudeau was not a real French-Canadian because his mother’s name was Elliott. It would unravel all of Levesque’s hard work..On May 14, 1980, at the Paul Sauvé Arena, Trudeau delivered the coup de grâce, in a way, that no other Canadian politician could even dream of..“Bien sûr que mon nom est Pierre Elliott Trudeau,” he declared. “C’était le nom de ma mère, voyez-vous?”.He continued, “It was the name borne by the Elliotts who came to Canada more than 200 years ago. It is the name of the Elliotts who, more than 100 years ago, settled in St-Gabriel-de-Brandon, where you can still see their names in the cemetery.”.He was just getting started, the Gazette reported. “Mon nom est Québécois,” he said in a play on the words of the No campaign slogan, “Mon non est Québécois.”.“But my name is a Canadian name also, and that’s the story of my name.”.He recited the names of Pierre Marc Johnson and his father and brother Daniel, a past premier and two future ones..“Now I ask you, is Johnson an English name or a French name?”.Trudeau threw in the names of prominent Péquistes such as Louis O’Neill and Robert Burns, members of an Irish-Québécois demographic that had so integrated with vieille-souche francophone families over generations that many of the province’s O’Learys and Doyles didn’t speak a word of English..The crowd had been chanting “Trudeau, Trudeau,” but switched to cries of “Elliott, Elliott.”.This wasn’t about a mandate question over sovereignty-association — it was about a sense of identity, Québécois et Canadien and being both, the Gazette reported..And there was also a question of pride in Trudeau as both a native son of Quebec and one who represented Quebecers on the Canadian and world stage. It was the moment the federalist forces clinched the vote that was delivered six days later on May 20, winning the referendum by a convincing margin..The Elliott speech was the capstone of four carefully planned Trudeau interventions in the referendum campaign. And it remains, the most historic..Prime Minister Jean Chretien, a Trudeau strong arm man — and a capable one at that — took a different route in the 1995 referendum, spelling out the repercussions of a 'yes' vote..“What is at stake is our country. What is at stake is our heritage. To break up Canada or build Canada, to remain Canadian or no longer be Canadian, to stay or to leave —this is the issue of the referendum.”.“The fact is, that hidden behind a murky question is a very clear option. It is the separation of Quebec, a Quebec that would no longer be part of Canada.”.“Where Quebecers would no longer enjoy the rights and privileges associated with Canadian citizenship. Where Quebecers would no longer share a Canadian passport or a Canadian dollar, no matter what the advocates of separatism may claim..“Where Quebecers would be made foreigners in their own country.”.Heady stuff, that would make anyone think twice. In other words, separation was, and still is today, a dangerous gamble..But in hindsight, would it have been better, if Quebec had separated?.Since then, they have got the “notwishstanding clause” built into the Constitution..They have basically banned English in Quebec..And they have received billions and billions in Alberta transfer payments, over several decades. Swimming pools full of cash..One could even argue that they have achieved sovereignty association and are openly laughing in our faces. The last laugh, you might say.. Rene LevesqueRene Levesque, author of Quebec's language law, Bill 101, which restricted the use of English in the province. .And in doing so, I think it has destroyed Canada. Destroyed everything that was great about our country..And — most concerning — they have driven western alienation to dangerous levels..Despite the equalization cash, Quebec refuses to help Alberta get its oil to tidewater. Not a chance in hell..As a total slap in the face of the proverbial gift horse, Quebec Premier François Legault told then newly elected Premier Jason Kenney there's no appetite for a new pipeline in the province, despite a passionate appeal..While Legault praised Kenney for his win and referred to his use of French as an "elegant gesture," he reiterated his government's opposition to a cross-Canada pipeline.."There's no social acceptability for an additional oil pipeline," Legault told reporters, though he added his government does support a pipeline that would transport natural gas from Alberta to Quebec..In any other country, democratic or not, that pipeline would have been OK’d. Perhaps even welcomed..Yet if Quebec was a separate nation, they might have taken a different view of that pipeline, especially if it benefited them..Leaving Canada would have given Quebec pause for thought, and heavy financial debts. Without question, more corporations would have left La Belle province, in the aftermath of separation..And let me just say, that while Quebec is, without a doubt, one of the most wonderful unique things about Canada — its music, culture, art and even its film industry remains vibrant — I honestly think, they would have been better off on their own..I would go even further to say that staying and being the spoiled brat of Canada, soaking up all the petro funds over the decades, has distorted the goodwill of Confederation, made Quebec a wholly dependent state and fostered a corrupt, false economy..Ask anyone who has lived in Montreal — they can’t even get their street potholes fixed. Corruption openly thrives at all levels of government..On top of this dysfunction, we have a prime minister more interested in being a Green crusader, than seeking foreign markets for our oil and gas..According to financial experts, Canada could have been using its LNG to save an embattled Europe ... and make billions in the process..Undoubtedly, one of the biggest missed opportunities in Canadian history..I don’t have a single thing against anyone in Quebec. I just wish they would have won independence via referendum..We would all be better off today, if they did. We could have washed our hands of the whole business and gone our own way..And yes, there is some wisdom in saying, that you can’t really understand a culture, unless you are a part of that culture. In clear hindsight, Quebec had every right to seek its own path. I believe that now..And Levesque was right. Quebec would have survived, and, it likely would have thrived..“I have confidence that one day… there's a normal rendezvous with history that Quebec will hold …” Levesque said. “We are Quebecois.”.In closing, let me say this; Alaska residents have received annual dividend payments from the state's Permanent Fund for over 41 years..Alaska's Permanent Fund Dividends (PFDs), sometimes called oil-wealth cheques provide residents with a cash payment once a year. In 2020, the PFD was US$1,114..After 40 years of wise management, APFC has grown the Permanent Fund to more than US$76.3 billion..In Norway, the Government Pension Fund Global, also known as the Oil Fund, was established in 1990 to invest the surplus revenues of the Norwegian petroleum sector..It has over US$1.19 trillion in assets, and holds 1.4% of all of the world’s listed companies..According to Wikipedia, as of December 2021, it was worth about US$250,000 per Norwegian citizen..Why are these regions so wealthy? Because they didn’t have to ship billions to a needy Quebec, that’s why. They invested in their future and did it wisely..Make a dollar, save a dollar..As a result, the Alberta Heritage Fund pales in comparison..According to the Globe & Mail, at the end of 2021, the value was approximately $4,200 per Albertan, and valued at $19.6-billion at year-end 2022-23..Think about it. It’s not rocket science.
“We were conquered people, our hearts set on surviving in some small way on a continent that had become Anglo-Saxon.” — Rene Levesque.The 1980 Quebec referendum was a moment in Canadian history that I deeply regret..The province-wide referendum took place on May 20, and the proposal to pursue secession was defeated by a 59.56 percent to 40.44 percent margin..A second referendum on sovereignty, which was held in 1995, also rejected pursuing secession, albeit by a much smaller margin (50.58% to 49.42%)..Under Rene Levesque, a Québécois politician and journalist who served as premier of Quebec from 1976 to 1985, the province seemed destined to leave. And it put the fear of God into English Canada..Like many other Canadians, at the time I thought it was important that Canada stay together. And what likely turned the tide, was Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s famous “Elliott” speech..According to the Montreal Gazette, it was the defining moment of the first Quebec referendum, and one of the greatest political speeches in modern Canadian history..It began when Levesque made a mistake — he gave Trudeau the ammo he needed..He was quoted as saying Trudeau was not a real French-Canadian because his mother’s name was Elliott. It would unravel all of Levesque’s hard work..On May 14, 1980, at the Paul Sauvé Arena, Trudeau delivered the coup de grâce, in a way, that no other Canadian politician could even dream of..“Bien sûr que mon nom est Pierre Elliott Trudeau,” he declared. “C’était le nom de ma mère, voyez-vous?”.He continued, “It was the name borne by the Elliotts who came to Canada more than 200 years ago. It is the name of the Elliotts who, more than 100 years ago, settled in St-Gabriel-de-Brandon, where you can still see their names in the cemetery.”.He was just getting started, the Gazette reported. “Mon nom est Québécois,” he said in a play on the words of the No campaign slogan, “Mon non est Québécois.”.“But my name is a Canadian name also, and that’s the story of my name.”.He recited the names of Pierre Marc Johnson and his father and brother Daniel, a past premier and two future ones..“Now I ask you, is Johnson an English name or a French name?”.Trudeau threw in the names of prominent Péquistes such as Louis O’Neill and Robert Burns, members of an Irish-Québécois demographic that had so integrated with vieille-souche francophone families over generations that many of the province’s O’Learys and Doyles didn’t speak a word of English..The crowd had been chanting “Trudeau, Trudeau,” but switched to cries of “Elliott, Elliott.”.This wasn’t about a mandate question over sovereignty-association — it was about a sense of identity, Québécois et Canadien and being both, the Gazette reported..And there was also a question of pride in Trudeau as both a native son of Quebec and one who represented Quebecers on the Canadian and world stage. It was the moment the federalist forces clinched the vote that was delivered six days later on May 20, winning the referendum by a convincing margin..The Elliott speech was the capstone of four carefully planned Trudeau interventions in the referendum campaign. And it remains, the most historic..Prime Minister Jean Chretien, a Trudeau strong arm man — and a capable one at that — took a different route in the 1995 referendum, spelling out the repercussions of a 'yes' vote..“What is at stake is our country. What is at stake is our heritage. To break up Canada or build Canada, to remain Canadian or no longer be Canadian, to stay or to leave —this is the issue of the referendum.”.“The fact is, that hidden behind a murky question is a very clear option. It is the separation of Quebec, a Quebec that would no longer be part of Canada.”.“Where Quebecers would no longer enjoy the rights and privileges associated with Canadian citizenship. Where Quebecers would no longer share a Canadian passport or a Canadian dollar, no matter what the advocates of separatism may claim..“Where Quebecers would be made foreigners in their own country.”.Heady stuff, that would make anyone think twice. In other words, separation was, and still is today, a dangerous gamble..But in hindsight, would it have been better, if Quebec had separated?.Since then, they have got the “notwishstanding clause” built into the Constitution..They have basically banned English in Quebec..And they have received billions and billions in Alberta transfer payments, over several decades. Swimming pools full of cash..One could even argue that they have achieved sovereignty association and are openly laughing in our faces. The last laugh, you might say.. Rene LevesqueRene Levesque, author of Quebec's language law, Bill 101, which restricted the use of English in the province. .And in doing so, I think it has destroyed Canada. Destroyed everything that was great about our country..And — most concerning — they have driven western alienation to dangerous levels..Despite the equalization cash, Quebec refuses to help Alberta get its oil to tidewater. Not a chance in hell..As a total slap in the face of the proverbial gift horse, Quebec Premier François Legault told then newly elected Premier Jason Kenney there's no appetite for a new pipeline in the province, despite a passionate appeal..While Legault praised Kenney for his win and referred to his use of French as an "elegant gesture," he reiterated his government's opposition to a cross-Canada pipeline.."There's no social acceptability for an additional oil pipeline," Legault told reporters, though he added his government does support a pipeline that would transport natural gas from Alberta to Quebec..In any other country, democratic or not, that pipeline would have been OK’d. Perhaps even welcomed..Yet if Quebec was a separate nation, they might have taken a different view of that pipeline, especially if it benefited them..Leaving Canada would have given Quebec pause for thought, and heavy financial debts. Without question, more corporations would have left La Belle province, in the aftermath of separation..And let me just say, that while Quebec is, without a doubt, one of the most wonderful unique things about Canada — its music, culture, art and even its film industry remains vibrant — I honestly think, they would have been better off on their own..I would go even further to say that staying and being the spoiled brat of Canada, soaking up all the petro funds over the decades, has distorted the goodwill of Confederation, made Quebec a wholly dependent state and fostered a corrupt, false economy..Ask anyone who has lived in Montreal — they can’t even get their street potholes fixed. Corruption openly thrives at all levels of government..On top of this dysfunction, we have a prime minister more interested in being a Green crusader, than seeking foreign markets for our oil and gas..According to financial experts, Canada could have been using its LNG to save an embattled Europe ... and make billions in the process..Undoubtedly, one of the biggest missed opportunities in Canadian history..I don’t have a single thing against anyone in Quebec. I just wish they would have won independence via referendum..We would all be better off today, if they did. We could have washed our hands of the whole business and gone our own way..And yes, there is some wisdom in saying, that you can’t really understand a culture, unless you are a part of that culture. In clear hindsight, Quebec had every right to seek its own path. I believe that now..And Levesque was right. Quebec would have survived, and, it likely would have thrived..“I have confidence that one day… there's a normal rendezvous with history that Quebec will hold …” Levesque said. “We are Quebecois.”.In closing, let me say this; Alaska residents have received annual dividend payments from the state's Permanent Fund for over 41 years..Alaska's Permanent Fund Dividends (PFDs), sometimes called oil-wealth cheques provide residents with a cash payment once a year. In 2020, the PFD was US$1,114..After 40 years of wise management, APFC has grown the Permanent Fund to more than US$76.3 billion..In Norway, the Government Pension Fund Global, also known as the Oil Fund, was established in 1990 to invest the surplus revenues of the Norwegian petroleum sector..It has over US$1.19 trillion in assets, and holds 1.4% of all of the world’s listed companies..According to Wikipedia, as of December 2021, it was worth about US$250,000 per Norwegian citizen..Why are these regions so wealthy? Because they didn’t have to ship billions to a needy Quebec, that’s why. They invested in their future and did it wisely..Make a dollar, save a dollar..As a result, the Alberta Heritage Fund pales in comparison..According to the Globe & Mail, at the end of 2021, the value was approximately $4,200 per Albertan, and valued at $19.6-billion at year-end 2022-23..Think about it. It’s not rocket science.
