The results of the referendum vote
show that the majority of the people in
Quebec are opposed both to the status
quo and the proposal of sovereignty-

association. In rejecting these options »

the majority, whether voting yes or no,
in fact voted for a new deal, for funda-
mental change, for anew relationship of
equals between English and French
Canada, with each having the right to
self-determination.

Sensing this overwhelming demand
for change on the part of the French
Canadian people, monopoly and its
political parties promised them a ‘‘new
federalism”, a repatriated Constitu-
tion, a new Constitution, were they to
vote no. To vote no, they said, was to
vote for change while to vote yes, they
threatened, was to vote for the status
quo and a dead-end for Quebec. This
demagoguery was the main theme ad-
vanced by Prime Minister Trudeau,
backed at the same time by the pre-
miers of all the provinces and by the
mass media controlled by monopoly.
These promises undoubtedly
influenced the outcome of the vote.

The declaration by Prime Minister
Trudeau and others that voting no
meant voting yes to a fundamental Te-
structuring of the Constitution is com-
pletely negated by his declaration that
“Quebec is a province like the others”.
Quebec is not a province like the
others. It is the home of the French
Canadian nation.

Trudeau's conception of the “‘new
federalism’? is added to by Claude
Ryan’s ‘‘Beige Paper”’ which calls for
far-reaching measures of decentraliza-
tion between the federal power and the

rovinces. This in fact is another var-
jant of the theme that “Quebec is a
province like the others’. In different

ways this decentralization of power is

echoed by all the other provincial pre-
miers, Liberal, Tory, New Democrat,
Social Credit, and by Joe Clark, federal
Jeader of the Conservative Party.
What would decentralization of
wer accomplish?
et would fragmentize Canada,
weaken its ability to deal with the grave.
economic and social problems arising
from the worldwide capitalist crisis,
undermine social security and equality
of opportunity, open the door to further
U.S. penetration of the Canadian
economy — all of this without satisfy-

ing in any way the national aspirations |

of the French Canadian people.

The purpose of decentralization of-

power is to sidetrack the central fact as
the existence of another nation In
Quebec, and the need for equality be-
tween the two nations ina united, inde-

_ pendent Canada, and to substitute for it

provincial rights and provincial pow-
ers.

Thus, underneath all the fine words
about a “‘renewed federalism’’ and a
new Constitution, the status quo will
continue. This means that the crisis of
Confederation will deepen. Canada will
be, pushed into ever more profound
crisis.

Steps to a
Constitutional conference

A Constitutional Conference on such
a basis is bound to fail. It can only suc-
ceed providing it starts from the stand-
point that the British North America
Act can’t serve the real national inter-

- ests. It has become a straitjacket, an

impediment to independent economic

development. Indeed it has accen-

tuated the crisis of development which

characterizes the Canadian scene to-
ay.

From the standpoint of relations be-
tween English and French Canada and
from the standpoint of independent
€conomic development of Canada 4

TRIBUNE PHOTO — TOM MORRIS

_ FOR A UNITED CANADA:

Two nations
in one state

new made-in-Canada Constitution is vi-
tal.

Within this framework a Constitu-
tional Conference must:

. 1 — Recognize the national aspirations

and the right to self-determination of
the French Canadian nation in Quebec
in anew made-in-Canada Constitution.
This Constitution is to be based on the
equal voluntary partnership of the En-
glish speaking and French Canadian
people in a bi-national, sovereign and
independent Canada. Such a demo-
cratic solution would be in the best
interests of the working people of both

‘our nations.

2 — State unequivocally that the real
national interests of the French Cana-
dian people, the preservation of their
language and culture, will best be
served in a united Canada on the basis
of the complete equality of our two na-
tions. Only a united Canada which up-
holds the national rights of the French
Canadian people can fight effectively
for its independence from the pressures
of U.S. imperialism. Without Quebec,
Canada can’t be united, and without

such unity Canada can’t be inde-
pendent.

3 — The new Constitution must estab-
lish basic structural reforms. To over-
come regional inequalities, these struc-
tural reforms must be based on the
necessity for all-sided economic
development in all parts of Canada,
combined with nationalization of all
natural resources, above all, energy re-
sources. Through joint federal-
provincial Crown corporations benefits
from the development of natural and
energy resources must accrue to. the
people in all Canada, as well as to those
in the provinces where the resources
are found.

4 — The Constitution has to embody a
Bill of Rights providing guarantees of
democratic rights for all Canadians.
These guarantees must ensure
economic, social, cultural and linguistic
equality. The rights to a job, to health,
to education, to housing, to equality of
rights for women. A decisive redistribu-
tion of the national income in favor of
the working people at the expense of
the corporations and the wealthy.

Statement of the Central Executive Committee
of the Communist Party of Canada, May 27, 1980

5 — The Constitution must include full
recognition of the national identity of
the Native peoples, enjoyment of reg-
ional self-government, full rights to
their language and culture, including
satisfaction of their land claims.

A made-in-Canada
Constitution

To ensure quality of the two nations the
new made-in-Canada Constitution
should establish Canada as a confederal
republic with a government consisting
of two chambers, one such as the
House of Commons today, based on
representation by population; the
other, to replace the present Senate, to
be composed of an equal number of
elected representatives from each of
the two national states. Each chamber
should have the equal right to initiate
‘legislation, but both must adopt the
legislation before it becomes law. This
structure will protect both democratic
principles: equality of rights of nations
whatever their size, and majority rule.

For English Canada, a new Constitu-
tion will make it possible to mitigate the
regional inequalities which result from
the inability of the Atlantic and Prairie
provinces to tax the big corporations
centred in Ontario which draw their
profits from the exploitation of the
country as a whole. It will make it pos-
sible to unify and centralize the social
legislation in all of English Canada
without transgressing on_ the
sovereignty of Quebec and on the na-
tional sentiments of the French Cana-
dian people. It will reassure all pro-
vinces that the great corporations will
not be able to escape responsibility for
establishing equal opportunities
throughout English Canada in educa-
tion, living standards, social welfare
legislation. vO

It will become possible to achieve
high uniform standards of education
with due regard for needed regional
emphasis in all of English Canada.
Above all, it will strengthen the bonds
of solidarity of the working people of
both nations.

The Communist Party of Canada,
which has fought throughout the years
for these proposals, firmly believes that
these, in fact, are the measures neces-
sary to achieve a democratic solution to
the crisis of Confederation. Experience
has already demonstrated that mono-
poly and the multi-national corpora-
tions and their political parties, be they
Liberal or Conservative, are incapable
of resolving that crisis, beset as they are
by regional. and other contradictions
and sectional interests.

Experience has also demonstrated
that the right wing of the New Demo-
cratic Party, because they refuse to face
up to the reality of the national ques-
tion, are tied to the status quo. They are
part of the problem, not the solution.

For Canadians in all parts of Canada, |

the crisis of Confederation and the re-
sults of the referendum have now posed
the question: What kind of Canada do

“we want?

Do we want the Canada of mono-
polies and multi-national corporations,
who own the decisive sectors of the
economy, finance, the media, and stand
in the way of basis democratic reform?
Or do we want a Canada in which the
people are truly sovereign?

It is the working class and demo-
cratic forces which can best answer this
question. Because monopoly resists

democratic change, the working class

of our country must take the leadership
of this struggle and rally support for a
new made-in-Canada Constitution but-
tressed by a Bill of Rights, and for over-
coming economic and social inequality
and the achievement of far-reaching
democratic reforms.

ae ee Ne Se aT eT See N AERP ONE

a Ee ET OO Se Se ES eS ee eS eee Lee es

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JUNE 20, 1980—Page 7