Chapter 7 – Majority and Minority Rights Unit 2 – Rights and Freedoms

Agenda 1. French Canadian Rights 1. French Canadian Rights 2. Aboriginal Rights 2. Aboriginal Rights 3. Multicultural Rights 3. Multicultural Rights

Learning Goal for Today By the end of the lesson(s), students will be able to identify past and present barriers to the equal enjoyment of human rights faced by French Canadian and Aboriginal groups in Canada By the end of the lesson(s), students will be able to identify past and present barriers to the equal enjoyment of human rights faced by French Canadian and Aboriginal groups in Canada

Expectations Expectations CGE3f – identify historical and contemporary barriers to the equal enjoyment of human rights faced by individuals and groups in Canada, and analyse their effects. CGE3f – identify historical and contemporary barriers to the equal enjoyment of human rights faced by individuals and groups in Canada, and analyse their effects.

Bill 101

*The French-English Conflict Fall of New France British chose accommodation of French Fall of New France British chose accommodation of French Francophone – principle language French Francophone – principle language French Anglophone – principal language English Anglophone – principal language English

*The French-English Conflict 1911 – Ontario government prohibited French-language schools 1911 – Ontario government prohibited French-language schools WW1/WW2 Conscription led to riots in Quebec WW1/WW2 Conscription led to riots in Quebec

*Quebec’s Quiet Revolution *Social, cultural and political upheaval that occurred in Quebec *Social, cultural and political upheaval that occurred in Quebec From isolationist, politically influenced by the Roman Catholic clergy, and rural-focused From isolationist, politically influenced by the Roman Catholic clergy, and rural-focused *Quebec became an open and industrialized society under Premier Jean Lesage *Quebec became an open and industrialized society under Premier Jean Lesage English still required for success in business in Quebec, even for Francophones English still required for success in business in Quebec, even for Francophones

*Masters in Our Own House New gov’t policies & gov’t departments, including the Department of Cultural Affairs New gov’t policies & gov’t departments, including the Department of Cultural Affairs Influence of the Church declined Influence of the Church declined Official Languages Act 1969 – all federal gov’t services to be delivered in both languages Official Languages Act 1969 – all federal gov’t services to be delivered in both languages

*Bill 22 – Quebec Official Languages Act Proclaimed French the only official language in Quebec Proclaimed French the only official language in Quebec Promoted the teaching of French in English schools Promoted the teaching of French in English schools The Bill also restricted the admission of immigrant children into English schools The Bill also restricted the admission of immigrant children into English schools

*Bill 101 – 1976 – Charter of the French Language Business to be conducted mainly in French Business to be conducted mainly in French Led to companies leaving Quebec Led to companies leaving Quebec No English on signs No English on signs Ford v. Quebec SCC found no English on signs violation of s.2 Freedom of Expression, but Quebec invoked s.33 Ford v. Quebec SCC found no English on signs violation of s.2 Freedom of Expression, but Quebec invoked s.33 Quebec later amended Act to allow English as long as no bigger than ½ the size of French Quebec later amended Act to allow English as long as no bigger than ½ the size of French

*Separatism Separation – the desire to establish a politically independent Quebec and to withdraw from Confederation Separation – the desire to establish a politically independent Quebec and to withdraw from Confederation Sovereignty-Association – the idea that Quebec would become a sovereign jurisdiction in all areas of law making, but would maintain an economic association with the rest of Canada Sovereignty-Association – the idea that Quebec would become a sovereign jurisdiction in all areas of law making, but would maintain an economic association with the rest of Canada

*Quebec Referendum: Round One May 20, 1980 – Levesque gov’t campaigned for sovereignty association May 20, 1980 – Levesque gov’t campaigned for sovereignty association Voter turnout exceeded 80% Voter turnout exceeded 80% Nearly 60% voted “no” Nearly 60% voted “no”

Quebec Referendum: Round One "The Government of Quebec has made public its proposal to negotiate a new agreement with the rest of Canada, based on the equality of nations; this agreement would enable Quebec to acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish relations abroad — in other words, sovereignty — and at the same time to maintain with Canada an economic association including a common currency; any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum; on these terms, do you give the Government of Quebec the mandate to negotiate the proposed agreement between Quebec and Canada?"

*Quebec Referendum: Round Two Jacques Parizeau, PQ, round two Jacques Parizeau, PQ, round two October 30, 1995 – over 90% of eligible voters participated October 30, 1995 – over 90% of eligible voters participated 49.4% voted yes & 50.6% no 49.4% voted yes & 50.6% no

Quebec Referendum: Round Two “Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement* signed on June 12, 1995?”bill respecting the future of Quebec * Agreement was between 3 separatist parties, not Ottawa & Quebec

*Clarity Act, 2000 SCC 1998 said Quebec can’t without consulting the rest of Canada SCC 1998 said Quebec can’t without consulting the rest of Canada Ottawa would have to would have to negotiate in “good faith” if a clear majority voted in favour of secession in response to a “clear” question Ottawa would have to would have to negotiate in “good faith” if a clear majority voted in favour of secession in response to a “clear” question

Clarity Act, 2000 The key points of the legislation included the following: Giving the House of Commons the power to decide whether a proposed referendum question was considered clear before the public vote; Specifically stating that any question not solely referring to secession was to be considered unclear; Giving the House of Commons the power to determine whether or not a clear majority had expressed itself following any referendum vote, implying that some sort of supermajority is required for success;supermajority Stating that all provinces and the First Nations were to be part of the negotiations;First Nations Allowing the House of Commons to override a referendum decision if it felt the referendum violated any of the tenets of the Clarity Act; The secession of a province of Canada would require an amendment to the Constitution of Canada.

Example of A Clear Question The referendum on independence to be held by Scotland in 2014 differs dramatically from the two referendums Quebec held in 1980 and The referendum on independence to be held by Scotland in 2014 differs dramatically from the two referendums Quebec held in 1980 and The issue in Scotland will be clear: independence. Equally clear will be the referendum question, just 10 words long: The issue in Scotland will be clear: independence. Equally clear will be the referendum question, just 10 words long: “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?” “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?”

Quebec’s Response – Bill 99 Called a "charter of collective rights" by Bouchard, Bill 99 asserted the right of the "Quebec people" rather than the federal government, to decide on Quebec's future Called a "charter of collective rights" by Bouchard, Bill 99 asserted the right of the "Quebec people" rather than the federal government, to decide on Quebec's future Said only Quebec legislature could decide rules for a future referendum Said only Quebec legislature could decide rules for a future referendum Said 50% + 1 was a sufficiently clear majority Said 50% + 1 was a sufficiently clear majority Didn’t consult aboriginal leaders Didn’t consult aboriginal leaders te= 01/whole.html te= 01/whole.html te= 01/whole.html te= 01/whole.html

Current Quebec Premier Premier Pauline Marois Premier Pauline Marois Elected 2012 Elected 2012 Sovereigntist Sovereigntist Minority government will likely stay hand Minority government will likely stay hand

*French Canadian Rights Take- Home Work Read pages 192 – 203 Read pages 192 – 203 Take high-level notes on Quebec’s Quiet Revolution, Separatism & Bill 101 Take high-level notes on Quebec’s Quiet Revolution, Separatism & Bill 101 Answer questions p.197, #1-4, p.198, Answer questions p.197, #1-4, p.198, #1-6, p.202, #1-5 & p.203, #1-7 #1-6, p.202, #1-5 & p.203, #1-7 Take high-level notes on The Quebec Referendum: Rounds One and Two & The Clarity Act, 2000 Take high-level notes on The Quebec Referendum: Rounds One and Two & The Clarity Act, 2000

Humour Break

*Aboriginal Rights Over one million people of Aboriginal ancestry in Canada today Over one million people of Aboriginal ancestry in Canada today 12 distinct language families and 50 different linguistic groupings 12 distinct language families and 50 different linguistic groupings

*Aboriginal Rights Aboriginal rights: rights that some Aboriginal peoples of Canada hold as a result of their ancestor’s longstanding use of the land as distinct nations Aboriginal rights: rights that some Aboriginal peoples of Canada hold as a result of their ancestor’s longstanding use of the land as distinct nations Vary from group to group Vary from group to group

*Aboriginal Rights Collective rights: Rights acquired as a result of membership in a group Collective rights: Rights acquired as a result of membership in a group Their collective rights concern the right to self-government and control and use of land Their collective rights concern the right to self-government and control and use of land

Aboriginal Rights

*Royal Proclamation of 1763 Recognized Aboriginal peoples as autonomous political units or nations and established the framework for future treaties. It declared that: Recognized Aboriginal peoples as autonomous political units or nations and established the framework for future treaties. It declared that: Aboriginal peoples were entitled to lands in their possession until or unless they gave or traded them away Aboriginal peoples were entitled to lands in their possession until or unless they gave or traded them away No one could purchase or settle on land recognized as Aboriginal territory with the exception of the British Crown, which served as the only agent for transferring land between Aboriginal peoples and settlers No one could purchase or settle on land recognized as Aboriginal territory with the exception of the British Crown, which served as the only agent for transferring land between Aboriginal peoples and settlers

*Aboriginal Rights In 1867, BNA gave the federal gov’t authority over “Indians and lands reserved for Indians” in s.91(24) In 1867, BNA gave the federal gov’t authority over “Indians and lands reserved for Indians” in s.91(24) Indian Act passed 1876 Indian Act passed 1876 No consultation or recognition of the right to Aboriginal peoples to self-government No consultation or recognition of the right to Aboriginal peoples to self-government

*Aboriginal Rights Future treaties Aboriginal peoples traded land for exclusive reserves and other benefits Future treaties Aboriginal peoples traded land for exclusive reserves and other benefits From 1830 on gov’t policy of assimilation (absorption) From 1830 on gov’t policy of assimilation (absorption) Problems with residential schools and abuse followed Problems with residential schools and abuse followed Indian Act was quite patronizing and before R. v. Drybones (SCC, 1970), the Act prohibited Aboriginals from being found in an intoxicated state Indian Act was quite patronizing and before R. v. Drybones (SCC, 1970), the Act prohibited Aboriginals from being found in an intoxicated state

Aboriginal Rights 1969 White Paper – in late 1960’s, the federal government still expected the Aboriginal people to assimilate into Canadian Life 1969 White Paper – in late 1960’s, the federal government still expected the Aboriginal people to assimilate into Canadian Life White paper proposed to repeal the Indian Act and to amend the BNA Act to remove the distinction between Aboriginal peoples and other Canadians White paper proposed to repeal the Indian Act and to amend the BNA Act to remove the distinction between Aboriginal peoples and other Canadians Strong opposition from Aboriginal Canadians led to the withdrawal of this proposal in 1971 Strong opposition from Aboriginal Canadians led to the withdrawal of this proposal in 1971

*Aboriginal Land Claims *Land claims are formal demands made by Aboriginal peoples for ownership and control of lands on which they live/have traditionally lived *Land claims are formal demands made by Aboriginal peoples for ownership and control of lands on which they live/have traditionally lived In recent decades, various Aboriginal groups have attempted to establish control over their traditional lands, based on the argument that land still belongs to them because title to it was never extinguished In recent decades, various Aboriginal groups have attempted to establish control over their traditional lands, based on the argument that land still belongs to them because title to it was never extinguished This is true especially in BC where treaties had not been negotiated This is true especially in BC where treaties had not been negotiated

*Aboriginal Title to the Land: The Nisga’a Claim *Calder v. A.G. of BC – SCC in 1973, decided that English law, in force when colonization of BC began, had recognized Aboriginal title to the land *Calder v. A.G. of BC – SCC in 1973, decided that English law, in force when colonization of BC began, had recognized Aboriginal title to the land *Case stood for the proposition that Aboriginal title, as a legal concept, exists in Canada *Case stood for the proposition that Aboriginal title, as a legal concept, exists in Canada Following this case, in 1998 the Federal, Prov (BC) governments and the Nisga’a people reached a final agreement Following this case, in 1998 the Federal, Prov (BC) governments and the Nisga’a people reached a final agreement

*Land Claims Specific land claims – claims that deal with specific grievances that Aboriginal peoples may have regarding the fulfillment of treaties and administration of lands and assets under the Indian Act Specific land claims – claims that deal with specific grievances that Aboriginal peoples may have regarding the fulfillment of treaties and administration of lands and assets under the Indian Act Comprehensive land claims – claims based on the recognition that there are continuing Aboriginal rights to lands and natural resources; these claims occur where aboriginal title has not been previously dealt with by treaty or other means Comprehensive land claims – claims based on the recognition that there are continuing Aboriginal rights to lands and natural resources; these claims occur where aboriginal title has not been previously dealt with by treaty or other means

Land Claims Land claims have proven difficult to settle Land claims have proven difficult to settle Boundaries are often difficult to establish Boundaries are often difficult to establish Until 1986, settlement of land claims resulted in loss of claims and title Until 1986, settlement of land claims resulted in loss of claims and title Also, non-Aboriginal Canadians “own” property in land-claim areas and have legal title to the land; resist settlements Also, non-Aboriginal Canadians “own” property in land-claim areas and have legal title to the land; resist settlements

Aboriginal Rights Between 1973 and 2003, 15 out of 85 claims have been settled and the rest remain in negotiation Between 1973 and 2003, 15 out of 85 claims have been settled and the rest remain in negotiation

*Aboriginal Rights Donald Marshall Jr. – member of the Mi’kmaq people, argued that he had the right to fish because of a 1760 treaty giving the Mi’kmaq people the right to earn a “moderate living” by fishing and hunting year round without a licence Donald Marshall Jr. – member of the Mi’kmaq people, argued that he had the right to fish because of a 1760 treaty giving the Mi’kmaq people the right to earn a “moderate living” by fishing and hunting year round without a licence Upheld by the SCC in 1999, but gov’t still has some conservation rights Upheld by the SCC in 1999, but gov’t still has some conservation rights Resulted in tension between Aboriginal fishermen and non-aboriginal fishermen Resulted in tension between Aboriginal fishermen and non-aboriginal fishermen

*Multicultural Rights Section 27 provides that the Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians Section 27 provides that the Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians

Humour Break