Volume V, Number 3, March 1987 -- Editorial on Polar 8, Eulogy to Russell Doern, foolish comments & fallacious arguments (Mulroney & Masse)
Volume V, Number 4, April 1987 -- Editoral on word "separatism", letter to editor re: Russell Doern, commentary by Pat Burns, Cost of Canada to the West in one month, On Bilingualism
Volume V, Number 5, May 1987 -- Editorial on Doug Christie/Pat Crofton debate, letter to the editor by Jack Ramsay on the Triple E Senate & separatism, Lessons from the Past (Progressive Movement in Ottawa), Bilingualism in Alberta, Doug Christie on Western Assembly fallacies
Volume V, Number 6, June 1987 -- Editorial on Reform Association/Party; Peter Weissbach interview with Doug Christie about First Minister's Conference
Volume V, Number 7, July 1987 -- Editorial on Western politicians & the Stockholm syndrome, Cost of Confederation (bilingualism, colonialism), Roots of separatism (Ontario's view of Quebec)
Volume V, Number 3, March 1987
So B.C. might just get the Polar Eight contract after all.... at least the federal government is willing to negotiate, depending upon the financial condition of Versatile Pacific. They must indeed be hard up for good news for Western Canadians if they’ll hold a press conference to tell us that.
At stake are several hundred jobs, and several hundred millions of dollars. But these figures need to be put into perspective, something that was nicely done by an article in the Globe and Mail recently, entitled "Ontario gets lion’s share of new jobs." (G&M, February 28/87) In it. we read that more than 95% of the additional jobs created last year were located in one province -- Ontario. We also read that "between January 1986, and January this year, the total number of jobs in the country rose by 137,000, according to unadjusted figures. But only 5,000 of those jobs were created outside Ontario."
It is also edifying to look at the possible benefits to B.C. in light of both the amount of money previously given to Quebec in other ship-building contracts, as well as the number of jobs lost in Alberta due to the combined Liberal-Conservative N.E.P. policy. Did you know that even HMS VANCOUVER was built in Sorel, Quebec, and that Alberta lost about 50,000 jobs over the N.E.P.?
Why couldn’t the feds throw us one little bone, the Polar Eight contract? Why couldn’t they give us the F-18 contract, especially when they had a built-in excuse to do so? Why does the hollaring through the media from every possible Westerner, and the lobbying of the central government by every possible politician and citizen, have such a small effect, that a big concession is to announce that the West might get the contract?
Every conflict between central Canada and the hinterlands always belies the simple fact of who holds the political power in Canada. That one fact rules all. That’s why the threat of Western Separation is not nearly as devastating to the federal interests as is one whimper or moan of complaint from Quebec or Ontario. Western grievances are dismissed as a psychosomatic illness of the mind, not even to be humored by generously and quickly giving us such boons as the Polar Eight or the CF-18. We are begrudged even that.
If you’re a Western Canadian, and such things don’t convince you that independence is necessary, you’re probably planning to move to Ontario.
Keltie Zubko
Brian Mulroney (Edmonton, July 6, 1984, as quoted in the Edmonton Journal):
"Yesterday, in the home town of John Diefenbaker, my colleagues and I rededicated our party to the cause of Western Canada and to the cause of one Canada -- strong, united, prosperous and proud. Together, we declared our commitment to making Western Canada a full and equal partner in the Canadian Confederation. We declared that we will prove to Western Canadians through our actions, not just our words. that the federal government can once again be their government, that the west need no longer feel like a colony of some distant imperial city."
Marcel Masse (article from the Calgary Sun, January 21, 1987):
MONTREAL (CP) -- Canada’s existence hinges on the prosperity of the province of Quebec, says Energy Minister Marcel Masse."That is part of the reason the Conservative government has committed so much federal money to the province," Masse said yesterday. Federal investments in Quebec "are simply the result of the dual imperative that history has presented to Canada ... Canada cannot exist without Quebec."
by Douglas Christie
They think they have buried Russell Doern and all that he stood for. Well, they may have buried his body, as surely as they have driven him to his death, but they have not buried his spirit. His story will be told.
He took the time to write his story down, the way so many of us should have done, and should do. It is a modest story, by a modest man. factually told about a courageous battle, where he stood alone - with the people. It is a story which we will tell, far and wide, which we will honour and remember. [Editor’s Note: "The Battle Over Bilingualism" by Russell Doern]
Because the media is generally controlled, they think that his story will be buried with him. I will prove them wrong. They think because they don’t put him forward as a credible person, and that because Howard Pawley damns him with faint praise, we will too. Howard Pawley, the man Russell Doern referred to as a coward, the man who rather than fight, lay down like a lamb for his eastern masters, will be remembered too, through Russell Doern’s book, because we will promote it. We will see that Doern’s struggle does not die.
I pledge further to avenge his death. I will fight by every legal and constitutional means the further extension of state-enforced official bilingualism --using the same calm, rational logic he used. I pledge to enlist as many people as I can to do likewise.
They drove him from public life; they humiliated and defamed him. They lie about him even now because he dared to defy the sanctity of the Eastern-Canadian myth. He said we should consider the British, German, Ukrainian and other English-speaking majority... and not give in to a vociferous, spiteful and mean-spirited arrogance of some French-language bigots. He was right.
When you look at grass roots Manitoba, when you see what Russell Doern stood for and how his courage at that time was loved, it is tragic and disgraceful that the people he’d supported when he was alive, didn’t support him. Perhaps they were intimidated by Eastern power and Eastern press.
The Howard Pawley government, who treated him so shabbily when he merely tried to warn them, should never have been so quickly forgiven by Manitobans. We will endeavour to remind them what he did; we will try to make all the West realize that Russell Doern was a courageous and loyal. son of the soil of Western Canada.
We will take him out of the broom closet that Howard Pawley put him in, after throwing him out of the caucus for speaking the truth about official bilingualism. Russell Doern belongs in the hearts of every thinking Western Canadian.
He had every reason to be disappointed in Western Canadians because when he needed us, we let him down. We can only rectify that in part by raising high his memory. as we raise high his cause. One official language for Western Canada!
Doug Christie
Volume V, Number 4, April 1987
It’s amazing how easily the word "separation" pops out when confederation really hurts. Premier Getty is letting that word loose more and more lately as he tries to tell Ottawa of the desperation of Alberta. That word is being spoken by greater numbers of young people -- especially that most discriminated-against category, young men -- to mean their hopes of finding a job in their home province rather than being forced to go to Ontario to work. It’s a word I felt very deeply just yesterday in the Federal Court of Appeal, while three Ottawa judges listened to two self-satisfied central Canadian lawyers (and a lawyer from B.C.) argue the case of a 77-year-old man brought before the Human Rights kangaroo court for putting "bad" messages on his telephone. When I reflected upon the possibility of a year in jail for this sick old man, the idea of western separation was very dear to me.
Anyone who reads the newspapers or listens to radio talk shows can’t help but nurture thoughts of separatism. This paper doesn’t need to have 12 pages of examples of the cost of confederation, since the major media is beginning to do that job. How could I compete with the Edmonton Journal’s recent full page of Don Getty giving the reasons for independence?
Read of the GM plant in Ste-Therese getting millions from the feds while the Polar Eight contract is still up in the air. Read about the first minister’s conference on native rights, and reflect that it wasn’t the presence of the three Premiers of B.C. Alberta and Saskatchewan that had such a huge effect there, as the absence of Quebec that really mattered.
Separatism is becoming as inevitable a stance for Western Canadians as we predicted it would several years ago, the inherent negativity of the word, notwithstanding. Now the positive side of the concept must become paramount. Westerners have been beaten almost insensible by confederation... just look at the individual cases you know of in the oil sector, in agriculture or any other area and you’ll see what I mean. It’s a devastating situation when one of the best farmers I know tells me that the only reason he can still afford to farm is because he sold land to the city of Edmonton for development!
That same farmer gave a speech to some high school students last fall and the one thing they enthusiastically applauded was his question: "Wouldn’t you like to build a new nation!?" I heard the same question asked in Calgary recently by a young man of his friend who was bogged down in wanting to know every last, tiny particular of the nature of the new Western Canadian country. ‘That question "Wouldn’t you like to build a new nation?" gave him a new conception of what he himself might be able to achieve.
The battle of the use of the word "separatism" is a non-issue; now we must help people realize that separation is not a desperate alternative to suicide, but the most positive, unifying and enlivening activity a people could undertake: nation-building.
Keltie Zubko
To the Editor:
It is with concern and regret that I observe the passing of Russell Doern, a tragedy for family, community and society.
As a fairly recent newcomer to Winnipeg, my contacts with Mr. Doern were brief and at irregular intervals during the Manitoba French language issue. Recently, as a worker on his 1986 campaign for Mayor, I came to know him better.
I saw a man who had the strength and courage to stand steadfastly behind his belief, something seldom found in our politicians; a man who stood up against a well-oiled political machine, the machine that acted for the minority and was deaf to the wishes of 80% of the people of Manitoba. This action was certainly not the democratic way.
The treatment Russell received by his colleagues because of his action was disgraceful. If that is an example of the "new democracy" implied by the NDP name, Canadians should reject every facet of it. The people should be the ultimate authority in a democracy, not the political party.
Russell Doern left an example that we all should heed; an example that tells us our freedom needs our constant individual and total effort to maintain. That effort was found in our Western pioneers, mostly from various Christian European ethnic origins. These people gave their all to create a free democratic society in Western Canada. We must not falter.
Russell’s action in that undemocratic French language episode of 1983, is reminiscent of Louis Riel in defiance of an "Ottawa power" steamrollering over him -- and this Ottawa power has continued to shaft the west.
Winnipeg has just lost a future Mayor; Manitoba has lost a courageous servant of the people; and Western Canada has lost a concerned Westerner. Worst of all, a family lost a father, son and brother.
Russell also left his book - "The Battle Over Bilingualism" - a book that should be read by every Canadian, especially Western Canadians.
For his strong stand on the side of democracy and freedom, a public memorial should be erected and attended each year. May he be remembered forever and his story be passed from generation to generation.
Fred Cameron
Winnipeg, Manitoba
(The fol1owing was transcribed from radio CJOR’s Pat Burns daily editorial. March 16, 1987.)
The subject of Western Separatism will not go away, much to the chagrin of emotional flag-wavers. The idea of Western Separatism is not fostered by outrageous red-necks, who are never so happy as when they are stirring up trouble and relishing the thought that they have upset the mental equilibrium of those persons who equate any such thought with prescind. No! The idea has its genesis in the best reason possible for change.
Westerners are second-class citizens in their own country. A region whose sole reason for existence in the eyes of the federal government -- and it doesn’t matter which party is in power -- is to act as a milk cow for Quebec and Ontario. This statement is indisputable, so much so that I will not bother justifying it, for if any Westerner does not know this by now, he is so stupid he should be treated as a second-class citizen.
The name of the game is power. In order for any political party to capture power at the federal level, it is necessary to cater to those two provinces, Quebec and Ontario. since between them, they control sixty percent of the seats in the House of Commons and in order to retain power once a party has achieved it, it must go on catering to those two provinces. It is a simple question of mathematics.
Peter Brimelow, a journalist with an international reputation, recently did an article on the subject of Western Separatism. Let me quote you a part of it. The last line is the one I like best.
In it he says.
"For an outsider, it is fascinating to watch Westerners working their way towards a political solution of their problems. A major step was taken recently when the Western Canada Concept Party decided to run candidates in federal elections. Previously, like the Parti Quebecois, the Western Canada Concept Party felt it somehow illogical for separatists to participate federally. But this excessive Gallic logic never troubled Irish Nationalists in the 19th century. They elected members to the British House of Commons and kicked up so much fuss, that by 1914 an Irish Home Rule Bill was actually on the statutes books. Only the outbreak of the first World War delayed its implementation.
"The dramatic impact that separatist candidates could have was illustrated by last fall’s Pembina by-election in Alberta. Doug Christie, the leader of the Western Canada Concept Party, got 2,800 votes, and consequently the Tory victor edged the NDP by only a few hundred. In other words, the separatists or particularist party defending western interests offers a way for Westerners to discipline the Tory party. It won’t be able to take the West for granted anymore."
Then Brimelow outlined some of the policies hatched in Ottawa to hurt the West. Let me quote:
"Above all there is the atrocity of the National Energy Policy. The National Energy Policy was essentially an attempt by Ottawa under the guise of Canadian nationalism to expropriate the West’s energy wealth. It was the climax of a decade of Ottawa politicking that has caused Canada to miss the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to develop its high-cost energy reserves which had been presented by OPEC’s price hikes.
"The Americans were willing to take the. risk and put up the massive initial capital investment needed to bring Canada’s reserves on-stream. Once this investment was in place, continuing to exploit the reserves would have been cheap. Canadians could now be coasting on the result. It is one of the great economic tragedies of modern times. All Canada, but particularly the West, should be holding treason trials and hanging politicians from bilingual road signs to ensure that never happens again."
(A review of the West’s losses in Confederation, during the past month.)
"Speaking of English as a second language, to make it a second language in any area of the United States would be a terrible mistake. It would do immense harm to those Spanish-speaking who are supposed to be helped.
"In areas of Florida, California and much of the Southwest, serious inroads have been made in putting Spanish on a part with English, especially in the schools.
"We’ve grown strong over two centuries from our diverse ethnic heritages. Out of the melting pot has come a relatively blessed golden land, combining freedom and a standard of living that’s a beacon to much of the globe.
"The things that flame the melting are shared ideals and goals -- and a common language. A child cannot come out of a home that speaks other than English as a native language and attend a school where the teaching and the reading are available in a foreign language and not be way behind the eight ball when it comes to being an integral part of a nation that speaks English.
"There’s no greater way to disadvantage anyone in these United States."
from: Forbes, Dec. 15/86 (as quoted in Grainews)
"The federal government doesn’t care how much the use of the French language costs you. A striking example is the recent order by the Canadian military of four Dash 8 planes, which is DeHaviland’s big seller right now. with orders coming in from all over the world. With each new aircraft goes a set of manuals covering operations, parts, maintenance, etc., produced in the English language.
"The Canadian government orderdemanded that all publications be bilingual. This is proving to be an absolute nightmare for each page layout. One estimate was that each individual book will be worth about $10,000! When a federal government man was asked what would happen if a French serviceman had trouble understanding the technical translation of something, the answer was, "Oh, no problem, he’ll just read the English!"
from: APEC Newsletter, Feb. 1987
A very significant event in the history of Western independence took place recently. It happened very quietly, almost unnoticed, even by the participants. In fact it was only made noticeable by its acceptance as commonplace.
It only took an hour and a half, but it belies a phenomenon that’s occurring all over Western Canada right now.
The quintessential western separatist was invited to debate that perfect representative of the Canadian system "right or wrong", a Western Canadian conservative Member of Parliament. This debate took place not at election time, when it would be natural. Nor was it contrived by a sensation hungry media, for their delight alone. Nor did it take place among politically immune adults, where the implications of either side’s arguments might be nonchalantly dismissed. No, it took place before high school students, with no election in sight, and closed to the adult population.
Notice: it wasn’t a representative of the "independence as a last resort" faction that was asked to debate, but the most absolute spokesman of the separatist stance, Doug Christie. And for the federalist side was Pat Crofton, M.P. Extraordinaire, whose efforts to conform to the new Canadian dream have pushed him so far as to study French. (No doubt so he can understand the NDP’s increasingly frequent use of that language in the House of Commons. Western NDPers, watch out!)
So what’s significant about this little debate?
One of Alberta’s best writers of letters to the editor, Rocky Thompson of Innisfree, recently commented that any idea passes through three stages before it’s adopted: ridicule, discussion and finally acceptance.
We’re all familiar with the ridicule stage. It’s been the cause of lawsuits on behalf of the WCC when the Edmonton Sun referred to us as the Alberta version of the KKK (recently won by Doug Christie.) It’s been the cause of many well-meaning but weak souls abandoning the idea because they couldn’t stand the pressure of such contempt. How does it feel when Canada’s national newspaper ignores the important political discussion at your convention, and instead devotes a whole article to reporting all the rumours circulating about your leader? Not many people can maintain their identity in the face of such abuse. So WCCers know a lot about ridicule, and those who’ve weathered the invective for the past five to ten years have mighty hefty skins and a healthy cynicism about the media.
Now we’re getting the chance to see how we do in the discussion stage. This has been going on for some time now; major newspapers on some days are a catalogue of reasons and rationalizations for western independence. The publication of Peter Brimelow’s book "The Patriot Game" has been the most telling sign of just how far that discussion has gone. Alberta/Western Report Magazine has had Ted Byfield provide a catechism for closet separatists almost each week now for years. A massive body of "independence if necessary" opinion has developed and is reflected in every source of Western Canadian public discourse.
Even the national media is forced to talk about it. Recently the CBC in Edmonton reported on the national WCC with an ad-like bit on the news, beginning with Christie saying, "I’ve always been a separatist," and ending with the summation by the reporter that, "these outsiders have gained a new respectability." Well, the media can say that, but never has our respectability been demonstrated so clearly as at the Clairmont High School debate, earlier this month.
The social studies teachers expected perhaps 100 students, since it wasn’t compulsory. Any students from throughout the whole school could attend, and over 200 finally packed the cafeteria.
Before the debate, Crofton said to Christie, "you’ve been doing this for years; this is my first time," so Christie went first. He listed the reasons for independence, and the means, as he’s done hundreds of times before. But this time was different: the audience listened so politely and so intensely, it seemed they were aware their future depended upon what they learned.
Crofton spoke, and to the surprise of everyone, his speech consisted mainly of buttressing the arguments of "that separatist, Christie!" He agreed with all the examples of western grievances, our arguments for independence. He almost seemed to belong to the "independence if necessary" crowd. But no, he thought Canada should "remain united." The only reasons he offered for this were appeal to fear ("Where would we get our money?") and a misplaced patriotism ("I’m a Canadian first, a British Columbian second.") He also had the nerve to tell the students that while there are terrible problems with the Canadian system, to the detriment of the West, those would be cleared up by the Conservative party, if only they were reelected!
The two men rebutted each other, and then the students started questioning them. Most wanted to hear from Christie on how the West could separate, but others attacked Crofton, for example when he’d named the 10 "western" cabinet ministers (like Joe Clark), one girl asked him if they too didn’t consider where their votes came from when they decided important issues. Grudgingly, Crofton admitted this was considered.
The applause was respectful for both speakers, but erupted spontaneously when Christie said that official bilingualism is unnecessary in the West. They weren’t convinced by Crofton’s voice from on high that bilingualism was essential because "30% Canadians speak English, 30% French, and 30% are ethnics." The students also responded to Christie’s points about the gigantic debt being prepared for the students’ inheritance. And once again we saw the excitement sparked by the idea of building a new nation. After the debate it was evident from the number and spirit of the students surrounding each speaker which one had prevailed.
But who had won wasn’t nearly as important as the realization that struck Doug Christie only as he was leaving the school: that the cause for which he’d been ridiculed over many long years was a part of the curriculum of Western Canadian high schools. And not to denigrate, deride or defeat, but as a reasonable alternative in the face of Western Canadian problems.
With such a level of discussion, can acceptance be far behind?
Keltie Zubko
Jack Ramsay on the Triple E Senate
To the Editor:
The emphasis presently being placed on the need for a Triple E Senate by the Getty government bodes well for the separatist cause. The hope for equality within Confederation through a Triple E Senate is a futile but necessary phase through which we must pass before Albertans accept independence as our only alternative.
In his demand for a Triple E Senate, Don Getty is offering the people of Alberta a hope upon which he cannot deliver. When Albertans see that it is Quebec and Ontario who possess the power to grant or deny Canadians a Triple E Senate, and when they realize these two provinces will never give up the power they now have to seize the wealth of the less-populated provinces by giving us equality through a Triple E Senate, Albertans will embrace independence as our only hope for the economic security and well-being of our people.
The cry for a Triple E Senate carries with it the indisputable message of independence. A message which demands a change to the inequities of Confederation that gives Quebec and Ontario the power to confiscate Alberta’s energy wealth through the National Energy Program, and the power to take the CF-18 contract from Manitoba and give it to Quebec after it had been won by the Winnipeg firm. This is a message of independence. A message that is now being carried to the people and voters of Alberta by two of the old line parties, including the Getty government.
All efforts for a Triple E Senate will fail. Not only do the advocates have to overcome the insurmountable obstacle of Quebec and Ontario, whose vested interests compel them to use their power to maintain the status quo, it is also clear the majority of provincial premiers want nothing to do with senate reform that will destroy their status at the federal level in the same way the American Triple E Senate destroyed the Federal role of the state governors in that country. The reluctance of the provincial premiers to support senate reform was clearly revealed when they refused to support Premier Bennett’s call for such action during the patriation of the Canadian constitution.
Premier Getty’s demand for a Triple E Senate may be his attempt to capitalize on the growing feeling of western alienation evident in the province and which is emerging strongly within his own party. If so, Mr. Getty may be taking a terrible gamble by offering the people of Alberta a false hope in Senate reform which he knows he alone cannot deliver. Mr. Getty and his federal counterparts had better beware the wrath of a patient people. The only alternative beyond a failed Triple E is independence, and this is the alternative Premier Getty is ultimately leading the people to. His efforts indeed bode well for the independence cause in Alberta.
Jack Ramsay
Camrose, Alberta
Our meeting in Edmonton on May 6th will be to organize an active campaign to keep Alberta a province with ONE official language. We intend to get as many people as possible to begin in Alberta what was done by Grassroots Manitoba. That organization mobilized the people to try to stop bilingualism in Manitoba, but when the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP all nicely agreed to make language a non-issue there in the next election, what could Grassroots Manitoba do? They had nothing to vote for but a prearranged Eastern Canadian conspiracy of silent acquiescence on language and Manitoba went quietly under the dictates of the Supreme Court of Canada into bilingual status.
No political option of separation was presented to the people of Manitoba and so they had to accept a "made in Canada" solution and surrender their practical one language preference, for a costly two-language fiasco, A la Brian Turner, Ed Mulroney or John Broadbent. They had it in the bag, and Manitoba went quietly to its predictable Canadian demise.
Alberta, with our leadership in the Western Canada Concept, can give Premier Getty the strongest possible mandate to negotiate against bilingualism. If Alberta is not unilingual then it can and will separate. Our job is to make Albertans aware of the advantages of so doing. In the process, we will take them a step further than Manitoba: out of the position of having no other option but to surrender. In essence, we are the party who invites Albertans to come of age, and start making decisions for themselves.
When Leo Piquette asked his coy little question in French, fully expecting the people of Alberta to roll over and play dead, like the people of Manitoba have been forced to do, little did he know It may well have sparked a powder keg which will blow bilingualism right back to Central Canada where it originated. There the politicians of Ontario can take turns seeing how low they can bow to the province of Quebec like a group of reverse limbo dancers, trying to win electoral favors by seeing if they can crawl lower than a snake’s belly.
The West surely is beginning to wake up and we are playing a major part in this process, much to the chagrin of our Eastern-based media. Let us not miss the opportunity to save for the people of Alberta, one language, and for ourselves, a place in history.
The following article first appeared on the front page of The Globe, a Toronto newspaper, on April 13, 1926, and expresses the viewpoint of the Leader of the Western protest party, the Progressive Party. Representatives from this party went to Ottawa with Western grievances, but without taking a separatist stand, much like those today who claim the West wants into Confederation, not out.
The article below, and the editorial following it demonstrate that Western Canadian strength without separation has been advocated since the West joined the country, and has gained us nothing.
GREATER TOLERANCE BY EAST AND WEST IS NEEDED IN
CANADA:
ROBERT FORKE, MP, URGES SOUND NATIONAL SENTIMENT TO UNITE
DOMINION
TOUCHES TARIFF QUESTION
Business Improvement Due to Energy of Canadians, Not to Politicians.
(Staff Correspondence of the Globe) Hamilton, April 12 -- Robert Forke, M.P. for Brandon, Leader of the Progressive group in the Dominion Parliament, in an address to the Canadian Club tonight, made a plea for greater tolerance between those of Eastern and Western Canada, and for a deeper sympathy for each other’s problems. The task confronting East and West of this Dominion, he said, was to create a sound national sentiment.
There were physical barriers in Canada, he said, which divided the country, and which had a tendency to develop different theories of economics and trade. These theories, in turn, necessitated a spirit of compromise at Ottawa in the framing of Federal laws.
ILLS OF PUBLIC APATHY
The safety of a democratic government was contingent upon the interest which its people took in politics. But the trouble with many democratic governments was that the people evinced little or no interest in politics, and ills sprang up as a result.
There was no use ignoring the fact that the Canadian people were divided rather sharply on certain fundamental questions of government. They must think seriously of this matter, and endeavor to reach an amicable settlement, he said. At the Atlantic the people there had shown some bitterness over Maritime rights. Even secession had been broached, but, he added, not seriously. Ontario and Quebec were essentially industrial, and Toronto, he said, archly, believed
it was "the centre of the universe." The district west of Winnipeg had many problems which called for greater railway development. As for the Prairie Provinces, Mr. Forke said his fellow-members at Ottawa did not know whether to bless or "cuss" these. British Columbia appeared to be satisfied with itself in most respects and had much of which to boast.
NATIONAL UNITY A NECESSITY
Canada was a land of extraordinary opportunity, but full advantage of this could never be taken as long as there was division between different sections of the country.
National well-being demanded national unity. The task of East and West, he declared, was to create a sound national sentiment. Mr. Forke touched upon the tariff, although, he said, he was told at Ottawa that he would not dare to mention that question in Hamilton. Nothing divided Eastern and Western Canada so sharply as the tariff. Each section had its own economic solution of the matter, but the question was whether the East or the West was to come the best part of the way to meet each other on something approaching mutual satisfaction.
The differences existing between East and West soon must be settled if Canada’s fiscal policy is ever to be determined, he said. The people of the West, he said, were accused of being narrow, sectional and selfish, but most persons were selfish so far as their own interests were concerned. The people of the West, however, were just as eager to see Canada prosper as a whole as were the people of the East, he said. Twelve persons in conference at a round table, he believed, would settle this question of tariff.
OTTAWA SITUATION UNSATISFACTORY
As regards conditions at Ottawa, Mr. Forke said they were not very satisfactory. People blamed the politicians, but it was the people who placed the politicians there, he would remind them. Some said there was a dictator at Ottawa, but if so, his hand did not lie harshly upon the people of Canada.
Conditions in Canada were showing steady improvement, he believed, but the credit was not due to Ottawa. Rather it was due to the energy and industry of Canadians, who appeared to be regaining their pre-war trend of things. Mr. Forke referred to the remarkable grain crops in Western Canada last year. It was no little achievement, he thought for 2,000,000 people to produce $100,000,000 of wealth. With the West prosperous, it followed that the East was prosperous. The people of Canada, he thought, were beginning to realize that no one could live unto himself.
WAR BURDEN STILL HEAVY
Mr. Forke dealt with taxation. The burden was heavy, it was true, but the war had to be paid for. There was no use in grumbling or making such grievances vocal, as some had done, nor was it seemly to voice regret because Canadians were patriotic and won an immortal name for this country in the World War. Heavy taxes would be with us for many years to come, and the situation might as well be faced with cheer. It took $400,000,000 to run the country, taking account of the war debt, the C.N.R., etc. Mr. Forke repeated there was no use grumbling at taxation, but something might be done even to apportion the burden.
Mr. Forke concluded by saying he appreciated the problems facing industry, and he earnestly hoped that these would be satisfactorily resolved. The people of Western Canada had faith in Canada and were optimistic of its future. The Hudson Bay Railway, he believed, would tap a great tract of virgin wealth. Leaving Hudson Bay out of it entirely and a railway would pay as a colonization factor.
(An editorial in the same paper, commented upon Mr. Forke’s speech, in the same terms as today’s media comment upon those groups pointing out the problems of Confederation, but which still plead for "Canadian Unity." We quote the last paragraphs of this editorial:)
"The difficulty of the task which confronts any Government in this country, divided by racial differences and great physical barriers, and with but 9,000,000 people occupying half a continent, was once more emphasized by Mr. Forke, who declared: "We will have to find some method of compromise, we will have to find some common standing ground."
"Sectional views have developed strongly during the years of depression, when each region has sought the remedy best adapted to its own conditions, irrespective of the other parts of the Dominion. It will take leadership, and a national spirit moved by understanding and reason, to overcome this condition. Mr. Forke, however, declared his belief that the people of Canada have still more individual happiness than exists in any other country on the globe today."
"Coming from the Leader of a group often accused of being animated by sectional views, the moderate opinions expressed by Mr. Forke will be welcomed, and should aid in cementing national feeling when it is strongly needed."
by Douglas Christie
The Western Assembly -- another occasion for Western Canadians to sit and commiserate about their problems, or an opportunity to work toward the solution?
This is the question which time and again comes to my mind as I ponder whether to go to Vancouver on May 31st and respond to "probing questions on western separatism" as my invitation implies. Do they really need more evidence!? Do they really want to examine the entrails of Western Canada yet again to come to the conclusion that the federal system has made us terminally ill? Or will there finally be a realization that we must all pull together to begin to build a new nation, one built by us and for us, in our common interest to protect our language, culture, land, resources and our Western destiny as a free and united nation?
So often have I seen sheer egotism wrapped up in the thinnest of intellectual disguises, refusing to agree to separatism even though its facts are correct and its analysis flawless, because "we wouldn’t want to give Doug Christie credibility," since I from the beginning staked the high ground, the clear road to Independence.
These more "acceptable" establishment "thinkers" now see it beneath their dignity to accept what I maintained all along. If only they could see that I do not claim this discovery to be my own creation, but rather to be the conclusion of both logic and common sense; I have no unique claim upon it. Rather, I ask that all of us who believe in the future of Western Canada unite in one party which is clear and true to that goal. My leadership of this cause is largely because no one else has taken this stand and tried to make it clear to the people. The truth is there for us all to see: the federal system is a cesspool of Eastern design and we have to get out to survive.
Dare I hope they won’t be offended? Dare, I hope once again that men and women of integrity can rebuild a hope from the shattered ruins of so many egocentric temper tantrums of the past? This time I hope there will be a willingness to treat me and the idea of separatism with some due respect, not the contempt so often accorded by those politically ambitious people who think money and compromise is a substitute for principle. Great things could be in store for Western Canada if we are united behind the one strong stand for the west: independence.
One thing I pledge to those who have put their faith in me, and in our cause of Western Canada: no matter where I go, I will give the courtesy due those who seek the truth, and a clear rebuke to those who seek to delude us into more surrender, more waiting, more begging, threatening or cajoling of those smug Eastern power-brokers. The best of such people are misguided fools; the worst are paid hacks and infiltrators for the federal system.
The one and true course, a commitment to Western Canadian independence, I will now and forever maintain. Nothing else means anything or matters. Independence above all, and forever. No political goal is worth attempting without it.
So Canada has a new political party and although, as one radio station covering the event commented, they don’t know what they stand for, who their leader is or if they’ll be ready for the next election, we are not at all surprised that the so-called "Western Assembly" used the pretense of this meeting to form a new partisan organization.
Is it cynical to doubt the motives of this group? No, not when we consider first of all that it was promoted as the meeting to find a solution to Western Canadian grievances and that widely-reported was its concern about separatism being considered as an option for Westerners.
(Oh, separatism! That bogeyman to the federalists in every guise!) The next thing we hear from the meeting is that separatism has been vanquished! Now to the little known fact that these people who organized the meeting first invited and then cancelled the invitation of the most articulate spokesman for the separatist cause, Doug Christie. It’s a pretty weak claim, to have vanquished separatism without allowing the champion into the fight. So now we have a new party, of "reluctant separatists". All those who for years have cried that we have to softsell separatism, put it on the back burner, use the word independence to mask our true aims, and generally come kicking and screaming to the idea of a new nation have at last found a home. It may only be COR by another name (without the redoubtable Elmer, of course) but the idea’s the same.
Other cries have been heard from the meeting, such as, "these guys have the right psychological approach to trick Westerners into being separatists." Clear it is not.
And therein lies the great danger for Western Canada. The old style politics in Canada, the kind that has created so much of our weakness and disunity, has been bred by the same kind of telling the masses one thing and meaning another. Examples overflow our newspapers, daily, of such political hedging and shifting from foot to foot, depending upon the most recent polls and rumblings from "public opinion."
Alas, that seems to be what many people require from their politicians; honesty and straightforwardness only serve to bewilder.
There is still no competition from any party, new or old, for the Western Canada Concept, the position of pursuing the rational self-interest of the West by means of separation, in a peaceful, democratic manner, carved out years ago by Doug Christie. There the party still stands, and will always stand. One mountain of certainty in a sea of shifting political sands, while the Reform Association offers Western Canadians only one more mirage.
Keltie Zubko
CJOR Radio, Vancouver May 5, 1987
Weissbach: The Eastern-dominated media has hailed the interim Constitutional accord reached on Thursday as the miracle of Meech Lake, an unalloyed triumph for all of Canada. Little-realized in all of the hoopla is the fact that Premier Don Getty, of Alberta sacrificed the demand for a Triple E Senate for a vague promise of yearly constitutional discussions. With each of the provinces now holding a veto over Senate reform:, the Triple E Senate appears to be well and truly dead. Doug Christie, the leader of the B.C. Western Canada Concept speaks to us now from Edmonton about the major change in our government which was agreed to last week.
Doug thank you for joining us.
DC: Thank you Peter.
PW: The Triple E Senate is a dead duck?
DC: That’s right -- and Bill Vander Zalm and Mr. Getty -- they agreed that that should be so.
PW: What’s the reaction in Alberta?
DC: Well, there’s -- astonishment would be the greatest simple explanation of it, I think. People have realized that the greatest possible insult has been given to them by ten people who met in the middle of the night and never consulted anybody.
PW: -And the agreement that they came to has fundamentally changed our system of government.
DC: Absolutely. It’s a straitjacket for the rest of Canada’s rather ignominious history.
PW: But it still has to be passed by the House of Commons and passed by ten other legislatures across the country.
DC: That’s so, but that was the case also with the Constitutional Accord of 1982, and it was reached in the same kind of desperate move behind closed doors by a little handful of people who had no mandate to do it. I was really astonished that Bill Vander Zalm would do this. We’re very disappointed.
PW: When you say a handful of people meeting in dark rooms at night, or during the night in desperation, what desperation did you see?
DC: Well, they desperately want to face the media with some kind of Central Canadian panacea so they can be well-received and pretend that they go down as "Founders of the Nation" whereas actually what they have become are traitors to the people’s rights.
PW: Has Getty said anything yet with respect to giving up on the Triple E Senate?
DC: Oh, he says he’s optimistic. That’s a pious hope, because Ontario and Quebec now both and individually possess the power to say "No!" and if they do, that’s the end of the matter. It’s really kind of strange that people would think that Premiers could save them. I guess they have demonstrated the futility of that hope.
PW: Where in the Constitution do the Premiers have power to change our system of government?
DC: They have to, in at least the legislature, have to consent to amendments to the Constitution. Now the amendment to the Constitution that occurred in 1982 was accomplished without unanimity, of course, without Quebec. In order to get Quebec’s support for the Constitution we had to reinstate unanimity, which of course Quebec wanted all along. This has been accomplished by a handful of people who, while being the Premiers, have not got a mandate from the people to change anything. Nor did they consult. Nor was there public discussion. If legislation is passed, it is because the governments of each provincial legislature are obviously in control. The Premiers will become the law of the land and that of course happens quite often in Parliament where Members of Parliament just do what they are told. Backbenchers, that is.
PW: It was speculated that the reason Don Getty came out so strongly in favour of the Triple E Senate before the Meech Lake meeting is because he was forced by his own caucus, and that there was separatist sentiment within the Tory government itself.
DC: Oh. that’s quite true, and I know some of those people who would be very embarrassed if I named their names and what they said. Nevertheless, I don’t feel constrained to prevent their discomfort because they have become quiet hypocrites. They tell the people one thing; they tell me one thing, and then the Premier does another.
PW: Don’t you think in view of that, that Getty must be in a great deal of trouble with his own caucus now?
(AT THIS POINT OF THE BROADCAST THE TELEPHONE CONNECTION WAS CUT OFF)
PW: This is Peter Weissbach at CJOR. My guest is Doug Christie, the leader of the Western Canada Concept Party, and we are reconnected are we?
DC: Yes we are.
PW: Was that divine intervention?
DC: I don’t know. I don’t think divine intervention; somebody’s intervention.
PW: Do you think that the recognition of the fundamental nature of French-speaking Canadians, not restricted to the province of Quebec could be used as an excuse to further the French fact in the rest of Canada? For instance, could we see bilingual legislatures now throughout the country?
DC: Very definitely. That’s what’s happening in Alberta, for instance, and that is why I am here. Leo Piquette instituted a single question with the requirement, of course, ultimately of translation of answers in French. And that’s what’s happening in Saskatchewan now. And in Manitoba, of course, it was forced on them by the Supreme Court. I would think that before very long we will see the same kind of agitation in British Columbia.
PW: Jack Ramsay, the leader of the Alberta Western Canada Concept, wrote in the Globe and Mail last week that the inevitable failure of the Triple E idea would lead to a great surge in separatist feelings. Do you agree?
DC: Definitely. It is already quite obvious. There’s a Western Assembly planned for the end of May, and they were going to talk about how to get into Canada. They wanted a Triple E Senate, and I think even Ted Byfield now recognizes that is a dead duck because the Premiers, to geta little patronage in the Senate for themselves, sold out and placed on hold the question of whether we would ever have a Triple E Senate. Just one more demonstration has been given that separatism now is really the only answer for those who think.
PW: Let’s take some calls:
Caller: Good morning Mr. Christie.
DC: Good morning.
Caller: You know it was a famous -or infamous - politician who once said "Promises are like pie crusts: They are made to be broken," and his name was Stalin. My conclusion when I listened to what happened at Meech Lake (or whatever you want to call it) was that Mr. Getty had bought a bill of goods. He bought the bill that they would promise to discuss the Triple E Senate, however they would leave in the hands of 25% of the population, to wit, francais canadiens, the right to veto any decision that was made as a result of this.
DC: Well, that’s right, and I can’t understand how Don Getty could be so, shall we say, stupid? I can’t think of another word for it.
Caller: Not at sharp as John Paul Getty, that’s for sure. What I can’t help but wonder about all of our Canadian decisions, it seems to be ultra...ultra secret, and we’re supposed to be a democratic society, are we not?
DC: The idea of a democracy is an interesting one because even in Corazon Aquino’s Philippines there was a vote on the Constitutional amendment, and surprisingly enough, even Adolf Hitler had votes on referenda on Constitutional change. We don’t get a vote.
Caller: If you want a big surprise, you read up the constitution drawn up by Josef Stalin. It reads as good as Trudeau’s, but a piece of paper is only as good as the person who puts it in writing, and then it is only as good as the guarantor, isn’t it?
DC: Well, we left that in the hands of the Courts, and the powers of appointment to the Courts, I think, were only Federal.
Caller: Well it sounds like another operation of searching for Manchurian Candidates up here. I don’t think he’s going to find them. Thank you for your time, sir.
PW: Thank you for your call. Peter Weissbach at CJOR. My guest is Doug Christie, the leader of the B.C. Western Canada Concept. I guess it’s not B. C. anymore. I’m confused: are you with the B. C. Western Canada Concept, or the Western Canada Concept?
DC: I’m the national leader of the Western Canada Concept, which is a federal political party that stands for independence for Western Canada.
PW: Are you plan to run federally?
DC: That’s right.
PW: Now, in view of what has happened at Meech Lake, are you prepared to also field provincial candidates?
DC: We have in the past and will in the future field provincial candidates as well. We had, as you know, supported Mr. Vander Zalm at the last provincial election, but as of now we will probably be withdrawing that support in the future.
PW: Do you think that the Triple E Senate was the last chance for non-separatist westerners to agitate?
DC: Yes, that was their only hope, and they now recognize, at least most of them who can see a little further than the ends of their noses, recognize that the reform in the Senate now is a practical impossibility. The ones who don’t want to face that will go on talking about it as if it were still possible, but most of them now know that it is utterly impossible.
PW: Now by giving this up, was there a bargaining chip available to Premier Vander Zalm and Premier Getty?
DC: Yes, just the same one he advocates for those who want to prevent Aids: the simple statement "No." "No, we don’t agree."
PW: So prior to Meech Lake they had no bargaining ability?
DC: Well, they had -- that’s probably true. If Mr. Mulroney wanted Quebec in so badly he could taste the next election, the Western Premiers, any one of them, could simply say: "Until you place before us an acceptable proposal for Senate reform, we agree to nothing, and that’s our top priority."
PW: And that would have prevented Quebec coming into the Constitution with its demands?
DC: So what? What do we care? Quebec has had everything from time immemorial. Quebec continues to receive special treatment, and we give more recognition to that in the new constitutional agreement.
PW: Fred, go ahead:
Caller: I wish the Western Canada Party luck, but I can see an NDP government all in control of Western Canada. They’re the opposition now. What do you think of that? Do you think they’ll be in before you will?
DC: No. And so what if they were, federally. The Progressive Conservative Party has adopted most of the NDP platform and puts it into practice in universal daycare, to its attitude in the United Nations, yet you and others fear the NDP. Well, you’ve got the NDP in government, at least their policies are.
Caller: OK, thank you.
DC: Thank you.
PW: Alberta Conservative MP Allen Cooper has said that the increase in separatism will open the way for the NDP to sweep the West.
DC: That’s the usual tactic. You see, they like to frighten their conservatives into voting for them, even though they really despise them. The fact of the matter is the vast majority of Western Canadians are not NDP; about a third would be considered NDP. However, the Conservatives have always used this scare-tactic. Whether we elected Mr. Mulroney or Mr. Broadbent really makes no difference to the West, but in order to keep their house tightly held together, the Conservative Party always voting like a bunch of sheep for some Eastern candidate, they’ll scare them with the NDP.
PW: Ruth...
Caller: Oh, I was wondering if you would be running a candidate in Point Grey? I’m absolutely disillusioned with the Conservatives and I can’t vote Liberal, and I don’t know whether there will be an independent running here. I just don’t know how I’m going to vote next time.
DC: Well I can only tell you that we will run a candidate everywhere we can, and with the help of people like yourself, we can make change possible. If people wait for someone else to provide the support or someone else to do something, nothing changes, you know. And we have an individual, moral responsibility to participate in government and make it what it ought to be.
Caller: I have been trying for years, but I haven’t gotten anywhere.
DC: Don’t give up. We haven’t and you shouldn’t.
Caller: Okay, thanks a lot.
PW: Bill go ahead
Caller: Good morning. I have to say this: The biggest problem we have with this constitution is the people had no say, whatsoever! That is the bollix of the whole thing. The Charter of Rights! We had nothing. That was done in a hotel kitchen in the middle hours of 1981 with the former Attorney General of Saskatchewan. In fact, one of the things that surprises me is that 45% of the NDP membership were totally opposed to the Charter of Rights, the entrenchment. They didn’t want the BNA Act or the Magna Carta brought here. Leave it in England and just continue on the way we did under the Common Law process. We were serviced extremely well up until 1981, the way we were. The fact is the Supreme Court now runs our country, and I don’t elect those people.
DC: That’s quite true. The institutions that used to govern under the Common Law system are severely limited at the present time. You have pointed to the greatest error in the whole constitutional process, and that is the greatest insult you can give to anyone, is to decide for them, without consulting them. The people in Canada have seen this demonstrated in 1982 and repeated again in 1987.
Caller: I’m surprised at Bill Vander Zalm. As far as I am concerned, I want to pull out of the Charter of Rights and go back to the Common law process. I want to see the politicians held responsible because I can vote those guys out, but I can’t vote the Supreme Court out.
PW: Thank you for your call. Doug, is it possible to separate?
DC: Well, Quebec had that right under referendum and it chose not to, for economic reasons. I see no reason why the people of Quebec have any more right to self-determination than the people of any province of Western Canada.
PW: Do we have a legal right to separate?
DC: Under the position that we took, and still take, the Constitutional precedent for the right to self-determination is the referendum in Quebec. The Prime Minister and all the Premiers agreed Quebec could. if it chose, separate. That cannot be different for us, and legally, if we have common law position, and we have, there is nothing that determines to the contrary.
PW: You’re talking common law, yet we are governed by constitution which is the ultimate say in this country.
DC: Yes, but the constitution is silent.
PW: It is silent in that area?
DC: Totally silent. There is nothing about self-determination. Actually, nothing about the right of any province to decide whether to join or not.
PW: Edward....
Caller: I’ve got some figures here saying we give Quebec one way or another, about 60 billion dollars year, and if there are 2 million families, that means that every family in Quebec gets $30,000 a year. It just came over the radio about an hour ago that we have 11% of the population and get 5% of the contracts. That means that if all the other provinces outside of Quebec get the same proportion, Quebec gets half the contracts for the whole of Canada.
Another thing, being in Alberta, where I was for quite a few years, when they got Lougheed and his quarterbacks, they lined up all the drilling rigs, particularly the pavillion rigs, and they were going to get all the secondary oil out and they were really going to go into getting the Tarsands out, and all that. They just headed for the border.
Now with the French in Quebec, they are losing all their industry and all you have to do is mention Quebec and all the problems it has caused Canada and everyone is going to flee for their lives financially and physically, and everything else, and they are never going to come back. I think we have a good chance of separating now.
PW: Isn’t that disproportionate? We don’t give Quebec 60 billion dollars a year?
DC: I don’t know what figures he is looking at, but there have been calculations indicating that well in excess of three billion dollars a year were given to the province of Quebec in 1973/74 fiscal year, for instance.
PW Three billions dollars a year?
DC: Yes. What at the time was equal to the total Alberta Heritage Fund, which just puts it in proportion. I do know that with the combination of federal taxes on revenue from resources and the process of equalization, Alberta alone in 14 years lost 91 billion dollars in the federal system and British Columbia loses millions annually.
PW: Stanley...
Caller: I would like to ask your guest if he can tell us what the rationalization is for the fact that Quebec has 25% of the population but it has 33 and one-third percent. Three seats on the Supreme Court?
DC: Because that is what is established, as far as I am aware, in the Supreme Court Act.
PW: Well, that’s not going to be entrenched in the Constitution as well?
DC: That’s right. With powers I believe, of recommendation from the province of Quebec alone, which is not the same as any other province, as far as I am aware.
PW: Stanley, thank you for your call. Doug thank you so much for making this time available.
DC: It’s a pleasure. Thank you very much.
(Peter Weissbach’s show [was] heard weekday mornings from 8:30 to 12:30, on CJOR radio 600 on the dial in Vancouver.)
Douglas Christie
The common realization exists among Western Canadians that Canada has a serious problem. As with all major problems the natural reaction prevalent today among many is to ignore it. The next most common is to treat the symptoms. The latter course is being adopted by the Reform Association, and was previously adopted by COR. "The problem is alienation so we’ll form a group to get into Canada." The only trouble is that to the vast majority of Canadians, i.e. those from Ontario and Quebec, alienation doesn’t exist. They do not feel alien to themselves, they have the power and they know it. The media does their best to make them so believe, and they do.
For sometime now, the Reform Association like some new committee of COR, only with money, has muddied the waters. They may draw considerable numbers of people who want to treat the problem as they see it, by its symptoms and not its cause. They will fail as long as they continue to take this approach.
The media will do their best to sustain them, however, since they serve Central Canada’s intent. They merely divert attention from separatism, but that is good enough because if the media doesn’t have to talk about separatism, it doesn’t exist...at least for some people. They hope.
The Reform Association, like COR before them, will last awhile and will fail for one reason more than any other: It doesn’t have a common binding principle. The discontented have a hundred grievances. but ultimately no solution without independence.
Recently in Manitoba I had the pleasure to meet and work with some fine people working for our cause. Fred Cameron, Ivan Merritt, Bertha McKenzie, Bill Waldie, Ralph Eisbrenner, Don Short, Bill Comer, and many others had established ten days of meetings. Committees were formed to carry on the Manitoba election work, in preparation for the next federal election. We have seen a real growth in membership in Manitoba because of their efforts. The meetings in Winnipeg, Brandon, Steinbach, Winkler, Portage la Prairie, Dauphin. etc. were very expensive and a heavy investment in time and money, but through them we are growing and building.
The plan is to continue to build in each province of Western Canada so that a dedicated body of people will stand clearly for the Separation of the West in the next election. We will let COR, the Reform Association/Party try to promote asking for a solution within Canada; we will continue to maintain the eventual position that all others must come to: Independence for Western Canada.
In time this truth will prevail. and independence will surely come. The West is a sleeping giant with strength yet unrealized. The Meech lake agreement has locked the West into Central Canadian control...and even Trudeau’s criticism doesn’t make it right.
A steady commitment to this one cause, a pursuit of independence with all that means for the West, will win in the end. We must never waiver, though many around us frequently do. That is the meaning of true leadership.
Independence can only be attained by those who consistently struggle for it, not those who come to the idea reluctantly and half-heartedly. Groups such as the Reform Association do not know if or when they will be separatist. If they were honest they would be separatist now.
The cause of Independence can only be achieved by those who are clearly and firmly dedicated to it. It is not the task of a debating society. The Western Canada Concept seeks and has always sought a new country. never equivocating or lying about "the one last try." People are not led by soft-sellers or hiding of the truth. but by clear truth, repeated over and over again.
Each time the Premiers emerge from one of their secret meetings with the Prime Minister to present the waiting citizenry with signed and sealed documents saying the opposite of their stated intentions upon entering that session, I’ve heard people repeat the same question in bewilderment: "What happens to those guys down there? Are they drugged? Do they get hypnotized? Intimidated? Maybe they were bought off....."
That was the refrain in the West during the Constitution agreement revelations, and now once more after Meech Like. Trudeau used to be ascribed with some terrible supernatural powers when he was shepherd of these gatherings, but it’s really nothing new, just the same phenomena that has occurred on a different scale every single time we’ve sent our representative from the West to speak for us in the halls of the colonial master.
Our surrogates stand open-mouthed with awe when they should be letting forth words of wrath and indignation at the mistreatment of Western Canada, decade upon decade. They try to compromise and demonstrate that Westerners aren’t really barbarians, but can be "nice," too, in the best tradition of Canadian niceness.
Countless MPs have begged our votes to go and tell it the way it is in faraway Ottawa....then have come home to tell us we don’t really understand the situation, as they now do. This they tell us with mesmerized gaze still inwardly fixed upon indexed pension or other benefit of belonging to Canada. We for our part are supposed to sagely nod our heads in agreement with our wise politicians who come home and tell us we should look at the broad perspective and realize how well off we are!
But Western Canadians are not so inclined to play their part in this charade any longer. Too many jobs have been lost; too many young people have gone off to Central Canada where the jobs are (and from there deciding at last to join the West’s only separatist party). Westerners have recognized, even if their politicians have not, that it’s the Stockholm Syndrome that has created such fiascoes as the constitutional agreement and the Meech Lake Accord. It’s a love-hate relationship between the kidnapped and their captors that has kept the West forever tolerating any indignity foisted upon us by the federal system.
And this is where the newly-formed Reform Party of Canada has made a big mistake: the last thing the West needs is to play along with that same old mindset that has led to Western Canada’s sustained, prolonged problems since Confederation began. What the West needs is not to be encouraged in its old colonial slave mentality, but to break away from that servile attitude, that "Yes, the Canadian system will change....and by the way, elephants can fly!"
Stan Roberts, a spokesman for the Reform Party of Canada recently said that Western Canada would be driven out of Confederation, though he was prepared to take a shot within Canada first. Ted Byfield, speaking for the same organization is reported to have said that the West should learn from Quebec and play the same game that’s gotten them every-thing they want.
Neither position, in my view, is good enough for Western Canadians. We’ve given it "another shot" for decades, and neither should the West become a petulant emulator of Quebec, when we have right now, everything we need for a strong, prosperous country.
That youthful vigor that seems to reside best in some of the oldest members of our society who still remember what it was like to build a nation, or to fight for one, or not to have everything handed to them instantly is beginning to grow in the West, in the separatists and in others. That is the spirit that will save Western Canada, not endless begging nor sinking to the level of those who’ve entrapped us.
Keltie Zubko
COLONIALISM
(an excerpt from Hansard, the official report of the proceedings of the House of Commons, January 29, 1987)
Dave Nickerson (Western Arctic M.P.): Mr. Speaker, 19th century colonialism appears to be alive and well in North America.
India has eliminated Portuguese possession of Goa; Hong Kong and Macao will shortly revert to China, and even tiny Iceland has resolutely and successfully defended its exclusive fishing zones against once mighty Great Britain.
But France is allowed to maintain its colony of St. Pierre and Miquelon in the midst of Canada.
Surely this is an anachronism in the (fourth) quarter of the 20th Century.
Worst of all, on the basis of this historic relic, France claims the right to catch tens of thousands of Canadian fish.
(Secretary of State for External Affairs Joe Clark) should start immediately, and as forcefully as possible, to pursue the termination of French colonialism within Canada’s domain.
REVEALING COMMENT
Marc Lortie, of the Prime Minister’s Office was heard to say on the 6 o’clock news June 2nd, 1987 regarding the First Minister’s Conference over the Meech Lake Accord, "They want to do a deal tonight." This doesn’t exactly reflect the kind of dignity and careful consideration befitting a constitutional agreement that will remain with the country into future generations.
OFFICIAL LANGUAGES ACT CHANGES INTRODUCED
Perhaps the most frightening thing about the bill introduced by the federal government to strengthen state-imposed bilingualism in Canada is the lack of criticism so far expressed. Once again we see all three major parties in agreement, while the ordinary Western Canadian is intimidated by cries of "bigot" and "racist" if he dares challenge the wisdom of these measures.
The changes include:
The Globe and Mail (June 26, 1987) quoted Tory backbencher Charles Hamelin as saying that the proposed changes should dispel the myth that the Conservative Party is the party of anglophones. (Did any Western Canadian still believe that?)
OTHER NEWS ON BILINGUALISM
Meanwhile, the committee of the Alberta Legislature set to determine whether NDP MLA Leo Piquette should he entitled to use French in the legislature, is obviously terrified of making an absolute statement on the matter. They say that it’s all right to occasionally use languages other than English in the Legislature, but also passed a motion that said the assembly is not breaching members’ privileges when it is conducted only in English. (Globe & Mail, June 25, 1987)
The issue of compulsory bilingualism remains an important issue, always lurking below the surface of politics in the West (and Central Canada as well.) An Ontario township recently came under severe attack for passing a resolution saying English was to be the only official language of the community. British Columbia was also criticized lately for its lagging behind other provinces in its provision of services in the French language, for example in the court system and in providing drivers’ tests in French. Commissioner of bilingualism, D’Iberville Fortier said, "We are interested in bilingualism as a free choice." Tell that to someone looking for a job in the federal civil service, crown corporations, etc.
Discrimination within the N.H.L. against francophone players has been alleged by two University of Ottawa professors, who said that francophone players are much better than their anglophone colleagues and that it would take 30 Wayne Gretskys to bridge the gap between francophone and anglophone offensive players. (Times-Colonist, May 22, 1987)
This division of almost every facet of Canadian life upon English/French lines belies a country essentially and irreparably divided.
THE HISTORICAL ROOTS OF SEPARATION
(Alan Banford of Port Alberni sends the following excerpt, quoted from "The Birth of Western Canada -- A History of the Riel Rebellion" by George F.G. Stanley, which in turn quotes from an article in the Toronto Evening News of April 20th 1887, urging an end to French domination and the ejection of Quebec from the Canadian confederation.)
"Ontario is proud of being loyal to England. Quebec is proud of being loyal to sixteenth century France. Ontario pays about three fifths of Canada’s taxes, fights all the battles of provincial rights, sends nine-tenths of the soldiers to fight the rebels, and gets sat on by Quebec for her pains. Quebec, since the time of Indendent Bigot, has been extravagant, corrupt and venal, whenever she could with other people’s money, and has done nothing for herself or for progress with her own earnings.
"Quebec now gets the pie. Ontario gets the mush, and pays the piper for the Bleu Carnival....
"...if we in Canada are to be confronted with a solid French vote, we must have a solid English vote. If Quebec is always to pose as a beggar in the Dominion soup kitchen she must be disenfranchised as a vagrant. If she is to be a traitor in our wars, a thief in our treasury, a conspirator in our Canadian household, she had better go out. She is no use in Confederation. Her representatives are a weakness in Parliament. We are sick of the French Canadians with their patriotic blabber and their conspiracies against the treasury and the peace of what without them might be a united Canada. With Quebec holding the balance of power Canada isn’t safe a moment. The constitution, or the British North America Act which is our alleged constitution, must be altered so as to deprive these venal politicians of their powers or else confederation will have to go. As far as we are concerned, and we are as much concerned for the good of Canada as anyone else, Quebec could go out of the Confederation tomorrow and we would not shed a tear, except for joy. If Ontario were a trifle more loyal to herself she would not stand Quebec’s monkey business another minute."
Back to Western Separatist Papers Index