Between a rock and a hard place: anglophone members in the Quebec National Assembly.

Garth Stevenson teaches political science at Brock University. He has just completed a book on the anglophone minority in Quebec politics, which will be published by McGill-Queen's University Press.

Canadian experience with linguistic diversity in representative institutions is among the longest of any country in the world, dating back to the creation of a legislative assembly for Lower Canada by the Constitution Act of 1791. The Quebec National Assembly is unique among Canadian legislatures in that anglophones are the minority among its members. There have been anglophone members in every assembly since 1867. In the early years, about a fifth of the members were anglophones, but there are now only 8 out of 125 members. (1)

What motivates anglophones to seek election to an overwhelmingly Frenchspeaking legislature, particularly when there is the alternative of seeking a federal seat? How do they adapt to a largely francophone working environment, which is for many a new experience? Are they successful in bridging the gap between the francophone majority and anglophone voters, whose political views are often at odds with those of the majority?

As part of a larger project, the author interviewed 28 anglophones (2) who are or have been members of the National Assembly. As might be expected, most of the interviewees were Liberals and most represented ridings on the island of Montreal. However, the sample included four members elected under the banner of the Equality Party, one elected repeatedly as an independent, and one elected as a Union Nationale member who later sat as an independent. One interviewee represented a largely rural constituency.

In the variety of their political involvement and experience prior to entering the Assembly, the persons interviewed were probably not much different from any other group of politicians, in Quebec or elsewhere. One member, Bryce Mackasey, had been a federal MP and Cabinet minister. Four had held elected office at the municipal level and two had been members of school boards. Others had worked as party organizers, in ministers' offices, or on the staff of the anglophone lobby group, Alliance Quebec. Many others had worked as volunteers in party organizations or political campaigns before becoming candidates themselves. For several of those who entered the Assembly for the first time in 1981, the referendum campaign a year earlier was a significant part of their apprenticeship.

In terms of occupations, the members interviewed were a fairly heterogeneous group, although almost all could be described as middle class. Surprisingly few had any significant experience in business. Only Kevin Drummond, Richard Holden and Reed Scowen had family backgrounds that corresponded to the traditional image of the anglo-business elite and, ironically, both Drummond and Holden eventually espoused the cause of Quebec sovereignty.

Provincial or federal?

Why would a Quebec anglophone contemplating a political career choose provincial rather than federal politics? Traditionally, anglophone Quebecers have identified more with Canada than with the province. Ottawa also has the advantage that fluency in French is not as essential, and for people living in Montreal or western Quebec it is even geographically closer than the provincial capital.

On the other hand, in contrast to other parts of Canada, a provincial member in Quebec probably has as much prestige and status as a federal MP, if not more. There are more provincial ridings in which to run: 125 versus 75 federal. Chances of obtaining a Cabinet portfolio are also somewhat better in provincial politics. It would be unthinkable for a Liberal premier not to have several anglophones in his cabinet and anglophones are often recruited specifically for this purpose.

Some of those interviewed admitted having considered running federally before they chose to do so provincially. Several had lived or worked in Ottawa in some capacity before they were first elected. However, no one interviewed expressed any regret at having chosen to run provincially. Many were predisposed towards the provincial level because it was provincial issues, such as language policy or opposition to the sovereignty movement, that motivated them to enter politics in the first place. Several interviewees suggested that, in the words of one ex-minister, the National Assembly "was really where the action was," or that it had more direct influence on the lives of the people whom they wished to represent. A member first elected in 1994 expressed the idea as follows:

When you look at the spheres of influence of the two levels of government it seems to me that the provincial government has more impact on the lives of English-speaking Quebecers ...When you look at powers--education and health care, the two big ones, being provincial responsibilities--it seemed to me that if I wanted to make a contribution for my riding and my community, this might be the place to do it."

Proficiency in French: before and after

It is well-known, and among present-day francophones quite often resented, that many Quebec anglophones over the years experienced little or no need to read, write or speak French. (3) This ability to avoid the burden of bilingualism, at least until recently, is often contrasted with the very different situation of francophone minorities in other provinces, who have difficulty retaining their own language, let alone avoiding contact with the other language.

The comfortable unilingualism of many Quebec anglophones was in part a function of their economic power and of the fact that their language was dominant in Canada and North America, but in the past their segregation was far from unwelcome to old-fashioned French Canadian nationalists, who discouraged mingling in residential neighbourhoods and particularly in the schools. This of course changed with the language legislation of the 1970s and the current emphasis on making French the common language of the province. About three-fifths of Quebec anglophones (compared to one-third of Quebec francophones) now claim to know both English and French. (4) While they may overestimate their own capabilities in some cases, there is no doubt that bilingualism among Quebec anglophones has increased in recent years. On the other hand, it is still far from complete and one can still live quite comfortably in Montreal without knowing a word of French.

Entry to the Quebec bar has always required some knowledge of French and those anglophone politicians who were also lawyers were thus bilingual. Most anglophones elected to the Assembly were not lawyers, however, and in earlier times many could neither speak nor understand the language of the majority. In 1958 Premier Maurice Duplessis directed his ministers, one of whom was an anglophone, to answer all parliamentary questions in French, even if the question was asked in English. (5) Yet two ministers who held office after Duplessis' death, Paul Earl and Raymond Johnston, were unilingual anglophones.

Times have changed, however, and most of those interviewed for this study claimed that they had been quite fluent in French before they were elected to the National Assembly. About a quarter of the interviewees said that their French was not really fluent when they were elected but that it improved substantially on the job.

How did those claiming prior fluency acquire it? Three members claimed to have learned French as children by playing with francophone neighbours. Another, one of the youngest persons interviewed, had been in French immersion in school. Three interviewees had francophone wives and one of these had also attended Laval University. Three had studied law at the University of Montreal. Richard Holden spent a year as a student in France and remembered it as the best year of his life. "I never limited myself to the English community," he said. "I lived in the larger Quebec, which so few of my contemporaries did." Several others had made a conscious decision as young adults to become fluent. One spent a summer with a francophone family at the age of 20 in an effort to learn the language.

A significant minority were not fluent when they arrived at the National Assembly. Most found their French improving significantly with practice as they became involved in the work of the Assembly. Eric Kierans, who had confessed to Jean Lesage when the Premier asked him to join his government that he spoke French "very badly," recalled that francophone colleagues on both sides of the house were helpful and sympathetic with his efforts to become more fluent: "Daniel Johnson and Maurice Bellemare and also Bertrand, when they questioned me in French, would speak slowly and articulate clearly to make it easy for me. That is the way politics should be."

In speeches on the floor of the Assembly anglophone members use a mixture of English and French, sometimes repeating a portion of the speech in both languages. One member said that he increasingly had to remind himself to speak English but that he was absolutely convinced of the necessity of doing so: "It reminds members that English is an official language of the National Assembly. It reminds people that an English-speaking community exists, whose hopes and aspirations are somewhat different from some members of the French-speaking community."

Another reason for using English on a regular basis was that it was appreciated by anglophone voters, particularly if the issue under discussion was one that particularly concerned the interests of the anglophone community. The anglophone media, at least radio and television, tend to ignore speeches that are not given in English.

Victor Goldbloom recalled that when first elected he had asked his leader, Jean Lesage, for advice on whether he should speak in English or French. Apparently Lesage replied that he should speak English if he was primarily speaking for the benefit of the English media or the voters in his riding and French if his primary goal was to be understood in the Assembly. This was sound advice, Goldbloom recalled, because if he spoke English for more than a minute many members would not bother to listen. A member elected several years later from an overwhelmingly anglophone riding spoke French most of the time since he was the Party's principal spokesman on a number of issues. However, he always included a few paragraphs in English.

In committees, French is used almost exclusively, except sometimes when cross-examining an English-speaking person or group that appears before the committee. Those who had been ministers recalled that discussions in Cabinet were always in French. The Liberal Party Caucus also operates in French, since many members are unilingual francophones.

Relations with colleagues

One purpose of the study was to discover how and to what extent anglophone members interacted with their francophone colleagues, professionally or socially, and whether they tended to feel closer to other anglophones in the Assembly than to francophone members. The Equality Party members were all anglophones but this fact did not seem to produce a warm mutual regard in all cases. The situation of the anglophone Liberals--who were the vast majority of those interviewed--is more complex and more interesting.

One question asked of the Liberal interviewees was whether anglophone members of the Liberal Caucus ever met together as a group. It appears that the practice exists but is relatively recent. It also seems to be more prevalent when the Liberals are in opposition than when they are in government. Governing parties tend to be less collegial, and anglophone ministers have little time and probably little inclination to meet with anglophone backbenchers.

After the 1989 election and the rise of the Equality Party there were very few anglophones in the Liberal Caucus, but a caucus committee on anglophone concerns was formed. Membership was open to any member who was interested and a number of francophones with significant anglophone populations in their ridings attended frequently. After 1994 the Party was again in opposition and anglophones were well represented in the diminished Caucus. The anglophone committee continued to exist but met less frequently and was apparently considered less important than before, since anglophone voters had returned to the fold. Less formal interaction among anglophone Caucus members seemed to intensify, however. As one of them put it, "At the end of the day you're sort of tired so it's nice to speak English. But it's not an organized thing and we always invite everybody, so whenever we rope in one or two of our francophone colleagues we kid them the next day that they're now members of the anglophone caucus."

Interviewees were also asked which other members of the Assembly they were or had been most friendly with. Frank Hanley, a lifelong independent who for some years was covertly supported by the Union Nationale, claimed to have friends on both sides of the House. Very few other members had friends outside their own party. Most seemed to have some francophone friends, although the tendency of anglophones to socialize with one another was apparent. William Shaw, who was the only anglophone in the Union Nationale Caucus for three years, said he felt comfortable with most of his caucus colleagues. Liberals who had served in the Cabinet were understandably more likely to count francophones as friends than those who remained on the backbenches. One former minister said his three closest friends in the Assembly were all francophones. Jewish members, and those who had spoken a non-official language in childhood, seemed somewhat friendlier with francophones on the average than those whose ancestors came from the British Isles. Francophone friends cited by more than one respondent were from ridings with mixed populations in Montreal or western Quebec and from the more strongly federalist wing of the Party. One interviewee recalled that francophone Liberals elected for the first time in 1985 were more nationalistic, and by implication less congenial, than the more senior members, perhaps because they came from nationalist ridings which had been won by the Parti Quebecois in previous elections.

Representational roles

In the Westminster model from which Quebec's formal institutions are derived, a member is supposed to represent all the voters in his or her riding, but anglophone members are also viewed to some extent as representatives of the anglophone community even though many or even most of their constituents may be francophones. Anglophone ministers especially tend to be viewed as spokesmen for their language group. At times these two sets of expectations may be contradictory.

Most of those interviewed emphasized that they represented all of their voters and not just the anglophones. One, from a riding with a francophone majority, admitted that he was "between a rock and a hard place" in trying to satisfy both kinds of voters. Most, however, perceived few if any differences in policy preferences between their anglophone and francophone voters, perhaps because francophones who choose to live in mixed or mainly anglophone ridings tend to be less nationalistic (and more affluent) than other francophones. Several boasted of the strong support they received from francophone voters. One claimed that the Pequiste mayor of a francophone municipality in his riding had voted for him, although the mayor's house displayed a Parti Quebecois lawn sign for the sake of appearances.

Most, however, acknowledged, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, that in some sense they were representatives of anglophones, of non-francophones more generally, or of a specific cultural community. One interviewee expressed pride in being the first member of his cultural community elected to the National Assembly and another saw himself as a spokesman for those whose mother tongue was neither English nor French. A Jewish member said that "in a way" he had seen himself as the representative of the Jewish community, particularly in earlier years, but that the leaders of the community had direct access to Liberal premiers and did not really need him as a go-between. Two ex-members from the West Island told of how they went to Quebec City expecting to represent all of their voters but were thrust into the role of anglophone spokespersons because that was what the Party expected them to be.

Some members accepted the role with more enthusiasm. Reed Scowen described himself as "a sort of unofficial conduit for a lot of English-language people who wanted to have access to the Premier." Anglophone ministers were expected to be spokesmen for the anglophone community, particularly when they came from the ridings in west-central Montreal that have traditionally supplied ministers to Liberal cabinets, in Ottawa as well as in Quebec. By tradition, Westmount represented big business, Notre Dame de Grace the English/Irish/Scottish middle class, and D'Arcy McGee, after it was created in 1966, the Jewish middle class.

Cross-pressures: community versus party

Parliamentarians in a Westminster-type system must somehow balance party loyalty and caucus discipline against the demands of their constituents and against their own personal beliefs and values. The problem is particularly acute for anglophones in the Quebec National Assembly, not so much because their personal views differ from party policy--although sometimes they do--but because the anglophone voters in their ridings are frequently at odds with predominant opinion elsewhere in the province. The gulf in political perceptions between anglophones and most other residents of Quebec has been starkly revealed in the plebiscites or referenda of 1942, 1980, 1992, and 1995, in 9 out of the last 14 provincial elections, and since 1984, in federal elections as well.

The Quebec Liberal Party has faced, with varying success over the years, the problem of bridging this gap, and the burden of doing so has fallen largely on its anglophone representatives, particularly those whose ridings have a solid majority of anglophone voters and those who attain ministerial office. One of these described the situation as follows:

Three generations of English leadership all had the same experience. You're torn between your constituents and their view of the world, which is radically different from the view of the majority of francophone Quebecers. They live in a different world. It's not the same culturally or politically--the premises aren't the same, the religious expectations are not the same, the whole value system is different. So if you're going to be a bridge between the two communities, you're going to get walked on, and we were walked on.

The subjects that have caused the most conflict in recent years have been Quebec's relations with Canada and, particularly, the status of the English language within Quebec. The high points of anglophone anger and resentment were undoubtedly Bill 22 in 1974, which made French the official language of Quebec and restricted access by allophones to English schools, and Bill 178 in 1988, which reimposed a ban on English advertising despite a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that it violated freedom of expression. Both led to an anglophone backlash against the Liberals in the next election and in both cases anglophone Liberal politicians faced intimidating and unpleasant behaviour from some of their anglophone constituents. There were also strained relations between those Liberals who, to some extent, shared the views of the angry voters and their colleagues, including some anglophones, who did not. The trauma and stress of these episodes were still apparent in interviews conducted many years after the events.

Anglophone members might support party policies unpopular with anglophone voters either from a sincere belief that the wishes of the francophone majority should be respected or simply to advance their careers within the Party. This is especially hazardous for those from solidly anglophone ridings. Even the four Equality Party members, all of whom were privately more understanding of francophone concerns than the Party's reputation would suggest, were accused by some voters and party militants of being too moderate. Liberals were often shocked by the vehemence of anglophone opinion. A former minister described the type of voters involved: There's a particularly unattractive, what I call, anglophone rump which is the weekly newspapers and some of the religious and service groups--what became the Equality Party constituency. ... There's sort of a semi-articulate rage, but what it really is is a deeply threatened lower middle class which is not mobile, whose children are gone, which is not bilingual. ... These were people with very legitimate fears and concerns who were looking for someone who was as mad as they were.

While anglophone politicians who were interviewed did not seem to share the sentiments thus described, several Liberals admitted that they had voted for measures of which they privately disapproved, choosing party solidarity over conscience. One member said, "From the first day of my political career on some issues I was outside the consensus within the Liberal Party." Some disliked particular provisions of Bill 22 or Bill 178 but voted for the bills because on balance they seemed reasonable. The episode most often cited as a triumph of party solidarity over conscience occurred early in 1988 when the Commissioner of Official Languages declared in his annual report that Quebec anglophones were "humiliated" by the ban on signs in their language. The Liberals decided to vote for a Parti Quebecois resolution condemning the Commissioner. Some anglophone members said in retrospect that they regretted voting for this resolution, and one called it "a terrible experience." Others rationalized their actions by saying that supporting the majority on this relatively minor issue made it easier to oppose Bill 178 later that year.

Public dissent from party policy by anglophone Liberal members has occurred on several occasions. John Ciaccia and George Springate voted against Bill 22. In 1981, nine Liberals, including five anglophones, refused to support a resolution that condemned Prime Minister Trudeau for patriating the Constitution without Quebec's consent. Two of the dissidents subsequently told the interviewer that they had opposed the resolution only because of public opinion in their ridings. On the other hand, three anglophones who voted with the majority faced severe criticism from their ridings for doing so.

The most serious split in Liberal ranks was over Bill 178, which anglophone voters opposed almost unanimously, particularly since Premier Bourassa had promised during the 1985 election campaign to allow bilingual signs. Three anglophone ministers, Richard French, Clifford Lincoln and Herbert Marx, resigned from the Cabinet and two backbenchers also publicly opposed the bill. (Of the five ridings represented by these members, four were won by the Equality Party in the following election.) John Ciaccia, representing a riding with more francophones and being urged by the Italian community not to resign, decided after some soul-searching to retain his portfolio. All of the above, when interviewed, recalled Bill 178 as an unpleasant experience. Joan Dougherty, who lost her seat to the Equality Party despite having opposed Bill 178, described it as "the end of everything we had fought for."

Other breaches of party solidarity during the second Bourassa government were less serious. Russell Williams voted and spoke against Bill 150, which called for a referendum on sovereignty in 1992 if the federal government did not make a constitutional offer acceptable to Quebec. Four ministers--John Ciaccia, Sam Elkas, Robert Middlemiss and Claude Ryan--were absent for the roll call on Bill 150.

Last impressions

Practically all interviewees had generally positive impressions of their years in the National Assembly. Two described it as "a wonderful experience" while another said "we had an absolute ball." Two who also served in the House of Commons appeared to find the National Assembly more enjoyable, and one said so explicitly. One praised Quebec City as a wonderful place to work. Another praised the collegial spirit in the Assembly and added, "It was a good five years for me. I enjoyed every day." Several said that it was more fun to be in Opposition than in government, and those who had spent most or all of their time in Opposition tended to be most positive. As one member put it, "You have the opportunity to learn a lot more, to practice things a lot more, you don't have administrative responsibilities, so you have a chance to get your feet wet without being under the gun. I enjoy debate, I enjoy parliamentary procedure, and the institution. I have a great respect for the institution."

Although several interviewees mentioned that politics required hard work and one said he was "exhausted" by the time he retired from the National Assembly, no one complained about the unilingual character of Quebec City or the predominance of the French language in the Assembly itself. Few had anything negative to say about the Assembly or about other members. Insofar as there were serious complaints, they were about anglophone voters, their sometimes unreasonable expectations, and the difficulty of persuading them to accept the political realities of Quebec. There was not a single complaint about francophone voters, and very few expressions of real hostility to Quebec nationalism. Most indicated that they were more sympathetic to Quebec nationalism than were their anglophone constituents; and some considered that their sympathy for Quebec nationalism had grown during their time in politics. As noted above, two interviewees, Kevin Drummond and Richard Holden, eventually became sovereignists. Both, ironically, represented Westmount in the National Assembly, and both had experienced difficulties with anglophone voters and party militants.

To a pessimist this might indicate a fundamental problem often cited by populist critics of representative democracy. As representatives are socialized into the parliamentary environment, they cease to reflect the needs and wishes of those who elected them. This problem seems to be particularly acute for the anglophone minority in Quebec in recent years. Anglophone voters have been angered by language legislation and frightened by the growth of the sovereignty movement. Their elected representatives, partly because of party discipline and partly out of conviction, have at times failed to express the sentiments of the voters. Denied an outlet through normal politics, some voters have vented their anger by supporting the partitionist movement or other forms of protest.

On the other hand, an optimist might argue that the Quebec National Assembly has been remarkably successful in accommodating anglophone members. Although the anglophone minority in Quebec is declining, and although it is obvious that a government can be formed with little or no anglophone support, anglophones play an important role in Quebec politics, at least when the Liberals are in office. Anglophone politicians have won some benefits for their community and have contributed constructively to the broader interests of the province. It seems unlikely that official language minorities in other provincial legislatures would have as much reason for satisfaction.

(1) . For further details see Garth Stevenson, "A Long Farewell: The Declining Representation of Quebec Anglophones in Parliamentary Institutions since 1867," National History, Volume 1, no. 1 (winter 1997), pp. 22-34.

(2) . The sample comprises the vast majority of those who are still living, although a few could not be contacted or refused to be interviewed. Four of the interviewees had adopted English later in life. One interviewee was first elected in 1948, five in the 1960s, seven in the 1970s, twelve in the 1980s, and three in 1994. Five had been elected four or more times to the National Assembly, four had been elected three times, eight had been elected twice, and eleven, including the three who entered in 1994, only once. Ten had held ministerial office in Quebec, all in Liberal governments. All of the interviews were conducted between August 1994 and August 1996.

(3) . Marc Levine, The Reconquest of Montreal, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990, 1-38.

(4) . Jack Jedwab, English in Montreal: A Layman's Look at the Current Situation, Montreal: Les Editions Images, 1996, 121.

(5) . Marc le Terreur, Les tribulations des Conservateurs au Quebec, Quebec: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval, 1973, 172.