Season 2: #10 Constitutional Renovation

Canada’s antique Constitution makes good government impossible. It needs radical renovation. Ending interprovincial trade barriers is just the start. Canada must explore the advantage of Québec becoming an independent nation within a cooperative framework, allowing both to thrive. 

Transcript

9          Constitutional Renovation

The threat posed by Donald Trump to Canada demands a response. Canada’s politicians from all political parties have, for decades, stuck to their traditional platforms. In the Trump crisis, they have united, willing to support economic steps to combat the tariff war that nobody wanted. 

The Trump attacks have strengthened Canadian patriotism. It is unity in the face of adversity. The trade war and talk of a take-over has prompted Canadians to look at politics with fresh eyes. It is a rare instance where Québec and the rest of Canada have a common enemy, and a reason to cooperate. When a trade war became inevitable, there was suddenly widespread discussion of steps that might help Canada survive the storm.

In particular, interprovincial trade barriers have suddenly become talked about.  According to one Liberal Minister, eliminating barriers could lower prices by up to 15%, boost productivity by up to 7% and add up to $200 billion to the domestic economy. Other experts say these figures are way, way off, citing flaws in the studies that produced the data. This said, there is momentum by provinces to eliminate the silly barriers and work together.

The real problem is much deeper. The real problem is the number of responsibilities baked into the Constitution in 1867, unchanged since then, that make effective, efficient government nearly impossible. 

Consider health care, which is a provincial responsibility. The 1867 British North America Act gave health care to the provinces. Butchers and barbers needed no national legislation. The men in charge at that time had no interest whatsoever in regulating midwives or herbalists. Anyone who wanted could claim to be a doctor. It was a decade after Confederation before the first medical school in Canada was created. Much has changed in medical science since then, and access to medicine is now considered a public good.

A century after Confederation, Canada tried to bring common sense to health care by creating a single-payer system. The provinces were still in charge. Most doctors would remain in private practice. Ottawa would simply send money in return for provincial adherence to a federal Health Care Act that required access to quality healthcare for all Canadians. While much of the medical system is excellent, the shortcomings are evident. 

Canada’s total health spending was about $344 billion in 2023, nearly $9 thousand per Canadian, a quarter of which comes from Ottawa. Canada’s health care costs more per capita than in most developed countries, partly because of administration costs that are eight time the average.

As of February 2024, approximately 6.5 million Canadians, or about 22% of the adult population, did not have a family doctor. It is going to get worse. By 2031, Canada may face a shortage of 78,000 doctors, and a shortage of 117,000 nurses.

Canada actually has 16 different systems. Each province has its own bureaucracy, its own standards, except Quebec which has two (English and French). Each province decides how many doctors and nurses will be trained in their universities. Each province pays for different service, at different rates. It is hugely inefficient.

In February of this year, the candidates to replace Justin Trudeau as the Liberal leader debated. They all spoke of how much they cared, and how they would demand results. Yet, without exception, they all proclaimed that health was a provincial responsibility.  They would never dare offend the provinces.

Citizens in need of health care would be much more efficient, and effective, if the entire health care system was a responsibility of the federal government. As with other interprovincial barriers to good government, this would mean less bureaucracy, uniform services, and a number of efficiencies. The caveat is that Canada may have an English language health care system, but Quebec would still have to run a separate French system.  

One way to achieve this would be for Ottawa to pass legislation to offer a single national system. The act could go much further than what provinces offer today. The system in concept could incorporate best practices from European countries to create better services at less cost.  This is something any political party in power could propose. 

Provinces would be enticed to join, with significant incentives. Provinces that jump on board early would be part of the planning.  Over time, provinces with unhappy voters could elect a government that will cut a deal and join the national system. The provinces would have a management role in local implementation, but over time it would grow into a single national system much like most European nations.  This approach is a bit like how Obamacare expanded in the United States… state by state. Where Republican state legislatures resisted, voters used referendums to override the state politicians. That could happen in Canada.

The second way to achieve a national system is to change the Constitution. This would be difficult, as the Constitution has been made nearly impossible to amend.  However, if a new province was to be created for the First Nations, the Constitution would be under renovation. In that debate, consideration would be given to a number of areas where provinces might cede power to Ottawa to reduce costs, and to increase efficiency. 

A national Education Department could ensure that Canadian universities remain the best in the world while anticipating future needs for the entire nation.  Planning for this would also include a strategy for student visas, and a path for immigration to meet Canadian objectives. 

Professionals like lawyers, engineers, and tradespeople should have national certification.  A national approach would anticipate future needs for the national economy, and fund educational institutions to ensure those needs are met. There would be an end to provinces underfunding universities and colleges, and then poaching graduates from their neighbours

Canada should have one securities regulator for financial transactions and investment. Building codes, safety standards, and permit requirements should be uniform across Canada. One regulator could oversee dairy, eggs, and poultry, replacing the provincial marketing boards. Food processing standards would be national. Canada’s energy would go through one integrated grid, not ten.  

Constitutional renovation is heresy. 

Yes, the efficiencies and cost savings would be immense. But provincial politicians would resist.  The premiers, described as “princelings”, jealously protect every power they have. Only immense public pressure could force change. No political party has even hinted at Constitutional renovation for two reasons.  First, it would rile Québec. Second, it is just too difficult. That is the problem.

If a Constitutional debate were to take place in spite of this reluctance, the question would be asked, what would be the role for the provinces, if all that power went to the federal government?  

While diminished, the provinces would still have responsibility for many activities that make an immediate difference in the daily lives of citizens. They might administer the actual delivery of health and education under the national departments, ensuring local decision-making on issues that impact the region or community. They would coordinate economic development, zoning, infrastructure, transportation, police and justice, cultural planning, and a host of other issues. It is no small responsibility.  

To strengthen democracy after renovation, Canada might introduce proportional representation, with federal seats assigned proportionally within provinces to give them a larger say. Provincial elections would continue, with the provinces determining how it that would function. The provinces would still be important, but different.

There is one other major change that might occur if Constitutional renovation was discussed seriously. That is Québec.  If Québec was to become an independent nation within a cooperative framework, both Canada and Québec would thrive. It has a potential long in the making.

In 1867, the Fathers of Confederation accepted two founding cultures: English and French. The English dominated. The First Nations were ignored. For a century, the Québécois were treated as second-class citizens.  By the 1960’s, Québec resentment had grown, and nationalism gained momentum in the Quiet Revolution. 

Pierre Trudeau’s mission was to keep Canada intact. He introduced bilingualism and other initiatives to appeal to Québec. It was never enough. Québec language laws, referendums on independence, and other policies all point in the same direction.  Québec is becoming a nationalist monoculture, one that rejects Canadian diversity and multi-culturalism.  Trump may have brought Québec closer to Canada, but this is temporary. In the long run, Québec nationalism will conflict with Canadian multi-culturalism.

Québec constantly demands and gets special treatment. The Ottawa political parties are blind to the resentment this has generated. They need every Francophone vote they can get. Anglophones in Québec are frustrated by this. Western Canadians also deeply resent the bilingualism bias and endless transfer payments. Canada’s political leaders choose to see none of this.

Québec is a nation according to classic definition. It has a distinct history, language, culture and territory. The Québecnationalist movement was inevitable; colonies all over the world were doing the same back in the ‘60’s. The Quiet Revolution demanded change. The FLQ gave it a sharp edge.

When René Lévesque won power, Québec introduced language laws that made French the primary language of education, business, government, and signage. They restricted English, and the discrimination was gleefully reversed.  The language laws drove out corporations with deep roots in the city. This was a price that Québec was prepared to pay, with the help of transfer payments from western Canada via Ottawa.

Economic nationalism was also part of the Québec plan. Québec nationalized hydro and built the James Bay project. The Indigenous nations, whose land was flooded, were given no choice. James Bay is essential to Québec, making it largely energy self-sufficient. Industries like aluminum smelting flourished. For nationalists, it was a huge success.

Education was one key to Québec’s success. The province created a network of CEGEPs, colleges unique to Québec. Universities expanded, building the middle class. And it all worked. 

Québec is now reaping the rewards. The population is well educated. Montreal is a hub of advanced science, technology and the arts. The economy is doing well. The province has acted as if independence was a reality. It has sent representatives abroad. It has its own public pension plan. It has its own immigration policy, and demands that immigrants speak French and adopt the values and culture of the Québecois. Multi-culturalism is explicitly rejected. Québec celebrates the Fête Nationale, and ignores Canada Day. Canada has formally agreed that Québec is a nation. In short, Québec is independent within Canada in almost everything but name.  

Québec is also seeing a rise in right-wing populism, part of a wider trend. In Europe and the United States, nationalist parties rose in response to a sense that traditional cultures were being lost. Leaders stoked fears of immigrants with high birth rates flooding in, criminals who were pampered even as they took jobs. Trump is an example of all of this, but he is not alone.

Québec has long feared being swamped by Anglophones. That was evident in the Quiet Revolution. It continues, with new legislation every year designed to protect Québec language and values. The province is currently considering whether to create its own Constitution.  This may be postponed in the face of American threats, but the trend is clear.

There are a number of possible events that might trigger serious talk of Constitutional renovation, and in the process raise the question of Québec sovereignty. A Grand Bargain for Indigenous restitution would force that debate. A major re-assessment of equalization payments may rile Québec. The passage of a Québec Constitution would be a tipping point.  

How should Canada respond? It may be time for Canada to wish Québec goodbye… and good luck. Canada and Québec need not be married to have a good relationship, “friends with benefits” are possible. This require re-imagining democracy. 

From the English Canada perspective, the 50-year experiment in bilingualism has failed. English is the global language of diplomacy, science, and industry. Canada could be Anglophone. Bilingualism would no longer be demanded of Canadians in public service, or high public office. Of course, services can be offered in a multitude of languages including French. Technology makes this easy.

Québec should be Francophone. It would be a small country, but with all that is needed to thrive. Québec sovereignty would require a new form of cooperation with Canada. Québec could then become the country it longs to be, with full control over justice, education, health care and immigration. It could have a distinct foreign policy, and stronger ties to the Francophonie.

One catch for Québec is that it would not get all the land that is currently within the provincial borders. Indigenous and Crown land would be returned to First Nations as part of restitution. A weak movement for Anglo partition already exists, and with independence it would grow. Parts of west Montreal and western Québec may want to stay in Canada. Québec would not like partition, but what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.  By the same token, some communities outside Québec may want to be part of the new Francophone nation.

Québec would likely keep the Canadian dollar. The two countries could cooperate on trade, food and drug safety, and a host of other issues. There should be no hard borders, or restrictions over where people live or work. Québec would ensure its cultural and economic interests are protected. Common sense would prevail.

To reinvent democracy, and how borders are managed, Canada could learn from the European Community. Even in the shock of the Trump betrayal, the European Union continues to coexist in what is essentially a confederation. The European Union cooperates on economic and trade issues. They share security, and with NATO undermined by Washington, will do so even more in the years ahead. 

The European Union is also undergoing renovation. Right wing nationalism is on the rise, but is not pro-Russian. The European experiment is still in its early stages, and is evolving especially in the absence of American democratic leadership.  

The desired outcome in all the countries upset by Trump betrayal is a re-invention of democracy, a new way of living peacefully on our crowded planet. Within and between democracies there can be a free flow of people and trade. There can still be collective security. Canada and Québec can achieve this, just as Europe can do so. We live in an age of change.

It is political heresy to suggest Québec leave Canada. No politician dare voice it. Yet it makes sense. It makes economic sense. It makes democratic sense, just as it makes moral sense to empower First Nation self-determination.

Constitutional renovation ultimately requires a change in the division of powers between Ottawa and the provinces, changes Québec would not accept.  Québec sovereignty opens a path to survival, to peace, order, good government, and a sustainable planet. 

Speculation about Constitutional renovation, of course, is simply words. Nice ideas, perhaps, but unlikely to become reality. None of our political parties have the courage to even consider it, or to challenge ideas long set in Constitutional stone. 

Government services in the meantime will decline. Inflation and unemployment will rise, and the national debt will grow. The economy will bumble along in crisis mode. Well-intentioned leaders will manage the Trump crisis as best they can. 

With luck, democracy in the United States will eventually survive, and the Trumpian threat to Canada will fade. But even then, climate change will cross the threshold to mass extinctions. The decline and fall of civilization in the age of oil will be almost complete. 

That is the arc of history that must be changed, and where Canada could play a seminal role. A positive way of looking at this frightening future is to see the decline of the United States as an opportunity. The next several years of economic and geopolitical chaos forces Canada to make changes simply to survive. In this period of turmoil, the situation is fluid, and a dramatic re-invention of Canada is one possible outcome.  If we know the destination, the outcome that offers hope for generations ahead, then it is possible to a map a route into the future.

On top of all this there is one unlikely wild card that deserves final mention. With the chaos of American politics, the possibility may grow that some states may consider secession. In the past, it was states like Texas that threatened to leave. In the future, the Pacific states, or New England, may feel they are under attack. Trump has spoken of Canada as a 51ststate. Perhaps the tables might be turned, and Canada could put out the welcome mat to American states in search of peace, order and good government.   

Constitutional renovation is a stop on the road to the future, not the destination itself.