Bill 22: Must Economic Growth be Achieved at the Expense of Cultural Development?

SIR ARTHUR CHETWYND:

I am known in some circles as a man who quite often jumps in where angels fear to tread--perhaps in the context of trying to use my fractured French it would be more appropriate to say--"where Anglos fear to tread!" Nevertheless I know you would not want me to spoil my record or spare your eager ears from at least a short burst of my linguistic brilliance in the French language--I use the word "French" instead of saying "Canada's other language" purposefully just in case my rendition of such a beautiful language as French might confuse you! So-one more time!

Son Excellence, Reverend Pere, chers invites, mesdames et messieurs: C'est toujours un plaisir de souhaiter la bienvenue a un orateur invite au Club de l'Empire du Canada. Aujourd'hui, c'est la deuxieme visite de notre orateur in vite. C'est donc pour moi un plaisir tout particulier, Monsieur le Ministre, de vous souhaiter la bienvenue parmi nous aujourd'hui.

It is certainly well known that over the years The Empire Club of Canada has been one of the most prominent, if not the most prominent, repository in Canada of the Anglo-Saxon culture and ethic. This is "deposited" in our Yearbook each year, which goes to close to four thousand schools, libraries, colleges and universities. Whatever is said here is on the record, with no bias one way or the other. We are pleased to provide a forum for this purpose. This makes it all the more pleasurable, each year, to invite to our platform leading Canadians, who are interested in presenting the point of view of Canada's other main founding culture.

Over the seventy-two year history of The Empire Club of Canada we have welcomed many prominent speakers from la belle province-speakers representing business, the arts, medicine, the media, the humanities, and of course politics. Within the last three years we have been privileged to hear from such distinguished people as the Right Honourable Pierre Trudeau, the Honourable Robert Bourassa, His Eminence, Paul-Emile, Cardinal Leger, Dr. Gustave Gingras, the Honourable Real Caouette and Mr. Claude Ryan. To date this season I have had the honour of introducing the Honourable Marc Lalonde from the federal cabinet, and Mr. Claude Wagner, the Honourable Member for St. Hyacinthe.

Our speaker today is our third visitor this year whose first language is French. Less than a year ago the Honourable Guy Saint-Pierre as Minister of Industry and Commerce for Quebec spoke to The Empire Club of Canada in this same room. His subject at that time was "Quebec is alive and well in Canada". Today we are more than pleased to welcome him again, representing the same ministry, and in the same capacity as a year ago. Today, however, he brings us a new message.

Those who have attended our meetings regularly this year will be conscious of the fact that the titles of many of our speeches have included such words as "crisis", "struggle", "battle". I think those are all known as "impact" words. We appreciate the fact that Mr. Saint-Pierre in describing his subject uses the relatively mild adjective "controversial". There are many Canadians who might employ stronger words in describing Bill 22. At any rate, I believe it is safe to say that Quebec's new language bill has left many people confused both inside Quebec and without. This makes it particularly timely and useful to receive Mr. Saint-Pierre's message today.

Canadian Confederation has often been described as an economic impossibility and a political miracle. Central to the concerns and tensions in Confederation have always been the matters of language and culture, hardly unexpected in a nation with two founding races, not to mention the fact that we have had a continual smaller infusion of peoples from other races over the years. We are fortunate that we live in a country where we can still enjoy the sublime luxury of discussing such matters with reason and good will.

Today the Honourable Guy Saint-Pierre is accompanied by members of La Regie de la Langue Franqaise under whom Bill 22, the "controversial" Quebec language policy legislation, will be interpreted and carried out. We welcome the Minister and the members of the Quebec Language Board to our meeting.

On this note I would remind you that club members and their guests and the press are invited to meet with the Minister and his delegation for an informal discussion from 2 to 3 p.m. in Room A to my right, when your questions on this legislation could perhaps be answered more specifically.

Mr. Saint-Pierre is the son of an American mother and a Canadian father. He was educated at Victoriaville College, and in 1957 received a degree of Bachelor of Applied Science in Civil Engineering from Laval University. He was awarded an Athlone Fellowship to the Imperial College of Science and Technology in London, England, and in 1959 he received his Master's Degree in Engineering from the University of London. He held a commission in the Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers from 1953 to 1964.

In 1964 he became Registrar of the Corporation of Engineers of Quebec, and in 1967 joined Acres Quebec Limited as Vice-President. He has resided in the Atlantic Provinces and in the west, as well as in Quebec. He was elected to Quebec's National Assembly in April, 1970 as member for Vercheres and in May of that year was appointed Minister of Education. In 1972 he was appointed to his present portfolio as Minister of Industry and Commerce, where he has not only taken hold at home, but has also travelled extensively, spreading the gospel to help assure the industrial progress and growth of his province.

He is one of that minority group, a businessman in politics--a very pragmatic one--who must relish challenge, when one thinks of his many "publics" and the firmly-based pressures which must press upon his office from all sides. Compared to similar jobs of his compatriots in other provinces, their situations must some days seem to our guest to be a piece of cake--une piece de gateau!

I have much pleasure in introducing a man I consider to be a great young Canadian, the Minister of the Quebec Department of Industry and Commerce speaking to us on the question: "Bill 22--must economic growth be achieved at the expense of cultural development?"

Il me fait grande plaisir de souhaiter le bienvenue a ce Canadien distingue, a cette reunion aujourd'hui dans la ville rein. Mesdames et messieurs, I'Honorable Guy Sainte-Pierre, le Ministre de la Industrie et Commerce du Quebec.

The Honourable Guy Saint-Pierre.

MR. SAINT-PIERRE:

Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, dear friends: C'est avec plaisir que je me retrouve aujourd'hui a votre table devant un groupe aussi select et receptif de personnalites de la region de Toronto pour continuer un dialogue deja amorce il y a deux ans dans cette chambre et poursuivre l'enonce de certaines opinions sur la realite canadienne, ontarienne et quebecoise d'aujourd'-hui.

Permettez-moi tout d'abord de vous offrir mes meilleurs voeux pour l'annee qui commence et en particulier de vous souhaiter un progres economique soutenu en 1975 en depit des secousses de l'economie mondiale et notamment de l'economie americaine qui nous permettent peu de certitudes pour la nouvelle annee.

Before going on into my speech, I think I would be remiss if I did not express my sincere thankfulness not only to members of your club who have invited me, but also for the good co-operation we have received from the Government of Ontario and particularly from Mr. Claude Bennett, Minister of Industry. I think it has been a very easy job for our man in Toronto, since he has received so much co-operation not only from the government circles but also from private circles in Toronto, in trying to portray to you, close to home, what is Quebec exactly today.

With you today, I would like to discuss the policies of the Quebec Government concerning the French language, especially as they may relate to economic progress and the everyday conduct of business. The Quebec Official Language Act, more commonly referred to as Bill 22, has raised many questions and much debate, despite a long and open discussion leading to its adoption on July 31st, 1974. Because of this, and the vital significance attached to this question by our government and the majority of Quebecers, I gladly accept this opportunity to promote a fuller understanding and support of our priorities.

I recognize that I cannot hope to touch upon all those areas with which you may be personally concerned. It is for that reason that your president has kindly arranged to set aside a bit of time at the conclusion of this meeting for an informal discussion period. I am also very interested to hear your thoughts on today's subject.

I believe we are all well aware of the economic uncertainty that prevails in many parts of the world. There is no denying that this uncertainty raises special questions. And for this reason some people are saying, "What we do not need at this time is an experiment in cultural realignment." These people are referring of course to the Official Language Act, Bill 22, and are asking the question "Why now?" My answer to this is, "Must economic growth be achieved at the expense of cultural development?" Let me say at this point, that Bill 22 is not an experiment, nor for; that matter, the name of a new Pope!

In fact, it is the result of a vital cultural concern, deeply, rooted in the nearly four hundred-year-old tradition of Quebec, for the maintenance of its linguistic heritage, a basic component of its essential character sustained to the present day through great sacrifice and hardship.

Bill 22 has been extensively discussed. As a minister in the Government of Quebec, I suspect that I have read more than my share of articles written about it. It appears to have provided some journalists and editors with a kind of lifelong mission on both sides of the fence, both on the French and on the English side. Yet, Bill 22 is still largely misunderstood. Many references to it have been taken out of context, many interpretations of it have been those that individuals wished to read into it, but the simple fact is that Bill 22 has probably been much more widely accepted both from the French and the English sides than many would care to believe.

Before going further into Bill 22, let us recognize an inescapable fact of our western society, the fact that cultural and social development must indeed go hand in hand with economic growth and welfare. To have one, we must also have the other. A progressive economic program in Quebec must be paralleled by a progressive cultural development, despite its difficulties and its challenge.

The year 1974 has been, for Quebec as for Ontario, a year rich in terms of economic progress, despite a number of weaknesses which we have no wish to disguise. On the positive side, such economic indicators as personal per capita revenue, total new investment, factory shipments, have all recorded near-record gains. We have been able to create 74,000 new jobs and, most encouraging for our future, manufacturing investment increased 44% compared to 1973 and compared to a national average of 37%. In brief, Quebec was able to maintain an above-average advance in 1974 and is working very hard to keep this momentum in 1975.

Despite these achievements there are still regional disparities. For the sake of national unity they must be corrected. It is equally obvious that our economic growth must be accelerated.

To do this means we had to establish priorities. We had to draft policies, pass laws and initiate a sense of urgency. In brief, here's what happened. We have tried very hard, and I believe successfully, to maintain a reasonable taxing policy.

- We have developed and emphasized training programmes in fields where the greatest potential for the future lies.

- We have put forward programmes to develop management expertise among our people, and while we acknowledge that in this area we have not been as successful as the Province of Ontario, we have seen nevertheless our pool of talented industrial specialists grow dramatically.

- We have offered fiscal aid, and also cash incentives and low interest subsidies in cases where economic priorities dictated so.

- We have developed and put into action certain para-governmental organizations such as the Quebec Industrial Development Corporation. This corporation makes loans available at reduced interest rates, takes equity positions in companies and guarantees loans, as the need arises.

- Further, we have identified certain industrial sectors that have traditionally been ignored by Canadian industry--areas such as basic metals and steel fabricating, and we have moved into these areas in a number of ways. As a result of our investments, the picture in 1974 was very encouraging in a number of areas where Quebec, traditionally, had to be satisfied to receive barely 10 to 15 % of total Canadian investments. I have in mind the chemical industry as an example, where in '74 we got 35 % of the total of Canadian investment. In other sectors, machinery and primary metal, there were substantial improvements too. In other areas, too, because the private sector was not moving fast enough in recent years we had to go ahead, as for example in the creation of a steel complex by a government-owned company, "SidbecDosco."

I don't think it is necessary at this time to go into detail in every area into which the Quebec government moved. Suffice it to say that we believed there were areas which were under-stimulated by federal programmes and were largely ignored by Canadian industry. It is into these sectors of the economy that Quebec did move, and with limited financial resources we have significantly accelerated our economic pace.

The results?

Our standard of living of course has been enhanced. Our cities have grown and prospered. Next time you are in Montreal or Quebec City, have a look at the number of new hotels springing up. We have turned the corner in Quebec, and this has created a new attitude in Quebec, one of pride and self-confidence.

However, because it is characteristic of human nature that when you're on the move, you don't want to slow down, people are demanding more. They are expecting more in the quality of their lives. They are expecting more in their degree of economic affluence, particularly in comparison with other regions of Canada and presumably the Province of Ontario is always the province which has been measured by all areas of the country, not only Quebec.

It is apparent that to meet these needs we must encourage entrepreneurship of a home-grown variety.

One rather interesting way we have accomplished this is to bring together a commercial association of no less than four hundred Quebec-based small and medium businesses, which is still growing. Through this group's own initiative a unified buying power, a unified export drive, a unified marketing approach is being developed to try to create better distribution channels and to insure fast growth for all these home-based industries.

We see this group as a component of our own indigenous Quebec economic base. It seems to us that in the near future, this kind of economic structure will lead to the utilization of Quebec resources and Quebec talent, providing innovative design and increased exports, and this will be the foundation of that progressive economic programme so necessary in the development of any society.

At Industry and Commerce, a department of the Government of Quebec, we are planning to identify a certain number of small and medium businesses and offer them preferential aid during their critical growth period, so that we may better assure their success and thus avoid a situation where bankruptcy or take-over might occur. Within existing federal-provincial agreements, we will also emphasize the development of six or seven key projects, industrial projects conceived to generate employment as well as significant spin-offs in secondary and tertiary sectors.

I realize that this has been a rather quick sketch of the scene--but essentially, this is where Quebec is now.

We are pleased with our economic progress and, we are generally optimistic about tomorrow. We believe the programmes we have put into motion will allow us to offset any highs and lows imposed on us by the international economic environment. However, as we have moved forward, it has become very apparent that we must apply this same sense of urgency towards the development of a sound and secure cultural base.

We recognize, of course, that there is a price attached to this development and we become more and more conscious of having to pay this price every day.

Canada's consciousness of the need to evaluate foreign investment is no less important than Quebec's awareness of this need on its economy but more so on the level of its culture and language developments. The reality is simply this-the fair, just and real need to accept, and in fact to encourage, the aspirations of five million French-speaking Canadians.

Quebec's legislation concerning our mother tongue by means of Bill 22 is not a stylistic exercise for dilettantes, or a political manoeuvre, or a sort of human experiment equivalent to the growing of snails in some Caribbean paradise. The linguistic and cultural problem of Quebec is as pervasive as obtaining our daily bread and butter.

It is a problem of immense proportion for which we, the government, had the obligation to establish positive and concrete action. We are face-to-face with five million citizens whose ancestors date back three to four hundred years and whose mother tongue has always been French. In the recognition of our future, in respect for our past, and in the realities of today, we had to act.

As late as 1970, millions of French Canadians worked exclusively in English and spent eight hours a day in plants, factories and stores which to a large extent proclaimed their raison d'etre only in English, and furthermore dealt with many financial and commercial institutions whose working language was primarily English.

Even though we have been here for centuries, and even though we have made a creative contribution to this reality called Canada, nine out of ten immigrants to Quebec chose to have their children educated in the English language arid after that to integrate with the minority in Quebec. In spite of our continued presence, bilingualism came too often to mean English-Italian or English-Greek in Montreal, as in Toronto. Just too many people, in my view, were paying token lip service to the French fact in Quebec.

I am not suggesting that all English-speaking persons or companies have been blind or unconcerned. This would be far from the truth. Many were conscientious for many years, were cooperative throughout the last decade, and have tried to exercise leadership within their community. However, the overall situation did not change appreciably and it became, therefore, a priority to give to French-speaking Canadians living in Quebec a status equal to their contribution to Canada.

This is what we had to do and what we have done, and I believe we have accomplished this with wisdom and moderation. And we have done it while maintaining the rights of those Quebecers whose mother tongue is not French. It is my heart-felt belief that the majority of Quebecers, and for that matter all Canadians cognizant of the French fact in Quebec, have recognized our intentions.

Within the business sector to which an important portion of Bill 22 was directed, the reaction seems to me not only logical, but devoid of negative emotion. And this again was true not only from the English sector of our communities but also in the French sector. I once said the best way to ensure that everyone would accept Bill 22 would be to pass another law, presumably Bill 23, which would force English-speaking Quebecers to read the French papers for one week, and vice versa, French-speaking Quebecers to read the English papers for one week, and everyone would conclude this was the best piece of legislation to ever come in. The reaction in the business sector, both on the French and English sides, was very mature and one of the most mature that we had. Certainly, however, within some multinational companies where basic international operations are carried on in English, or again in companies where the language was generally English, Bill 22 has sometimes been viewed as a kind of constraint or imposition, and of course received less than joyfully. The same can be said about taxes and anti-pollution measures.

But please make no mistake. The language question is as vital for Quebec as the assessment of the right level of taxation or the protection of its ecology. Most business leaders that I have had the pleasure to meet have recognized this fact, and some have even confided to me that programmes of Francization are already in existence and some go much beyond the measures provided by Bill 22. They also told me that if these initiatives had been broadly taken some ten to fifteen years ago in la belle province, maybe we would not be discussing "language" in Quebec today.

Bill 22 requires that all public signs be in French first. It does not prohibit bilingual signs.

Bill 22 stipulates that all businesses incorporated in Quebec shall adapt their firm names into the French language in order to obtain a corporate identity in Quebec. Firm names may nevertheless be accompanied by an English version.

Bill 22 also imposed upon the government the responsibility of seeing to it that those companies or businesses interested in dealing with agencies and departments of the Quebec government, as well as municipalities which desire certain financial benefits or subsidies, hold a certificate indicating the company's willingness to respect the French reality of Quebec.

To obtain the certificate, such companies must have initiated a programme that they design themselves with the help of the staff of La Regie de la Langue Francaise, a programme of francization, specifically a programme which promotes the use of the French language within Quebec as the language of work and of communication within the company as it operates in Quebec, as well as in its advertising, sales and marketing activities. However, the law does not impose any condition which in my mind would destroy the effectiveness of the business organization.

There are in Bill 22 certain key words which are repeated in a number of instances and which are to be found in some of the most important sections of the law, and these words, if logically applied, make for a subtle and sensible application of the law. These words may be my only contribution to the drafting of the legislation, but they are words on which we have spent an awful lot of time, and they occur on a number of occasions. These words are "while taking into account the situation and structure of each firm", which means that Bill 22 cannot be interpreted as a sort of very simple approach by which all of the firms have to do the same things. We try with each firm, taking into account its situation and structure, to adapt the francization programme which fits that particular firm. It's obvious there is quite a lot of difference between the headquarters of the Royal Bank which is in Montreal and a firm that operates completely in Quebec City and whose total market is within the Province of Quebec. I think these words can mean many things. Another fact, too, if you look at the people who have been appointed to La Regie de la Langue Francaise, we have tried (with due respect to university professors, and intellectuals in general) to insure that a good component of these members could bring in the practical experience of day-today contact with business organizations.

If we want French-speaking Canadians to have access equally to all positions within the hierarchy of the firm, if we want French-speaking Canadians to be able to work in French and to communicate horizontally and vertically in', French, we also want to bear in mind the value of English is the language of international business communications.)

It does not necessarily mean our intent is to make French the language in every boardroom, especially of multinational or national corporations whose head offices are in Montreal. This goes against practical, common sense. We have no intention of slowing down or of rendering more difficult the already complex communications of a larger firm. We are sensible enough to understand that if, for example, Canadian Pacific wants to build a hotel in Vancouver and the preliminary engineering work is done in Montreal but will have to be eventually executed by English-speaking Canadians, the project will have to be done in English to a large extent.

In other words, Bill 22 is designed to give a status of permanency to the French language in the Province of Quebec. Bill 22 recognizes the presence of this language and tries to make it a viable force in the multi-cultural and multi-lingual reality of Quebec and Canada. In the process of realizing these objectives, we have tried not to lose sight of the economic imperatives.

Furthermore, this law, the logical fulfillment of the profound aspirations of the French-speaking people of Quebec, who by the way have no intention of isolating themselves from the rest of North America, in all of its applications, this law is the instrument of the future. It is not meant to distort the present. As far as I am concerned, I am convinced that it is a just and equitable law.

I also believe that those who insist on provoking an emotional debate concerning the language of education do so for personal reasons. It seems evident, at least to me, that English-speaking teachers who continue to oppose Bill 22, do so for reasons of their own. They see it as seriously affecting them as individuals earning a living, and the eventual possibility of losing their jobs.

As the birth rate is presently declining in Quebec, and therefore, if the English-speaking system does not assimilate the same proportion of immigrants as in the past, it is obvious that certain teachers may have to search elsewhere for their livelihood. That is, no doubt, why many parents and many of their friends are engaged in what I consider a sterile debate with the majority of Quebecers which can only lead to disharmony and serious cleavages. They seem to forget that the Government of Quebec has a special responsibility. It is the only government which the French Canadians can effectively control, since they constitute the majority of the citizens of Quebec. It would be undemocratic if certain pressure groups were allowed to mock the will of the majority, but this does not mean that the right of the minority and constitutional rights are not abided by. In drafting Bill 22 we were conscious that Quebec could receive many immigrants over the next five to ten years, if economic conditions are good. One has to remember what took place in West Germany and in other European countries which yearly had to import substantial numbers of immigrants from a number of countries-Turkey, Yugoslavia, Spain, Italy, and so on. We want the situation for them to be crystal clear in the years ahead.

While respecting the rights of immigrants whose mother tongue is English and allowing them to use the English-speaking public education system, the Government of Quebec wants all others to know that Quebec is a human experience which expresses itself primarily in the French language. While English is not and cannot be forbidden and since the assimilation of immigrants is inevitable, we want them to know that they have to integrate themselves within the French-speaking majority.

The situation is to me now very clear. If certain groups on the other hand refuse to see beyond their immediate interests, if they challenge the expressed will of the majority to go against the word and the spirit of the law, and to falsify its intent for demagogic purposes, then they are sowing the seeds of racial-linguistic tensions which the legislator in his moderation attempted to prevent with Bill 22 by confirming the needs of French-speaking Canadians and the rights of English-speaking Canadians.

In all seriousness, I would consider it a provocation that Italian children, for instance, be induced at a very early age to learn English in order to avoid having to go to French schools. The same would be true with other immigrant groups.

There has been a lot of talk in newspapers and media about the free choice of parents to send their children to the school of their choice. May I remind you, and I would like to leave it to you to draw the comparisons, that they are not taking account of the many educational systems we are supporting from public funds. In Quebec, we have a protestant system, a Catholic system, and a neutral system. These three can be sub-divided into an English-speaking system and a French-speaking one. And you have to add to all of these a very large share of private schools which at the secondary and the community college levels are very heavily supported through public funds. I think that nowhere else in Canada would you see this liberty of choice financially supported out of public funds.

The government of Quebec continues to carry out its operations in both French and English. It recognizes willingly, to those Canadians whose mother tongue is English, rights which are full and complete and which go much beyond those recognized by the governments and people of other provinces in so far as their French-speaking citizens are concerned.

We do it willingly.

As you well know, among French-speaking Quebecers, two elements confront each other. On the one hand, some French-speaking Quebecers (and I am in that group) say to themselves: "Look, we make up about 30% of the Canadian population. Let's try to occupy 30% of the place, 30% of Canadian institutions, 30% of its cultural and economic life, in spite of the fact that personal sacrifice will be required over the long term. Let us also attempt to use the experience of this bicultural reality as an international experiment in living. Make of Canada," they conclude, "a democratic country in which minorities are fully and completely respected and protected."

On the other hand, there are other Quebecers who say, "Let's occupy 100% of Quebec, and forget completely the Canadian dream."

Bill 22 is within the framework of French-speaking Quebecers who believe in Canada. It provides to our French-speaking population the first real linguistic security they have known. They can now turn their energy and creative talents to the living of Canada. Surely no one will doubt that without this fundamental security, we cannot have peace and harmony and decent human relationships between the various groups of our society. What we have without this security is racial intolerance, hostility--in other words, a situation in some respect analogous to that which prevails in Northern Ireland.

My intention is not to pose veiled threats or to practise brinkmanship. On the other hand I cannot renege on my statements on what I believe to be the true situation in Quebec today.

I am an enemy of violence. I am personally a Quebecer convinced of the value of being a Canadian. However, not all in Quebec share my views, nor for that matter all in Toronto, or elsewhere in Canada.

I wanted to come and tell you that Bill 22 is a reality and a law, and that it is a moderate law. I will not claim that it is perfect; neither is it a meaningless gesture coloured by racial intolerance. It is the result of a sincere conviction by the members of the Government of Quebec to calmly formalize the aspirations of the French Canadian majority in Quebec, also a founding minority of Canada.

After four hundred years in North America, the francophones have not been assimilated and are still an individual cultural entity. So let us face reality and accept la petite difference.

A moment ago, I told you I was a Canadian, I will now tell you why. There are two reasons: I have read my history books and secondly, I know this country well, as I have observed it not only from various places from within but also from without. I have faith and confidence in our future, and in the exceptional opportunities that are being offered in '75 to all Canadians.

And so this is why I came to Toronto, to your table, in your presence, so that the decision of the government of which I am a member, as incorporated in the lawful legislation passed by our democratic assembly, be fully understood.

Personally, I want to pursue this discussion and engage with you in a dialogue which I hope will be free from massive emotion and abuse. Together, we can look at reality. Together, we can forge a better future for ourselves and our children. Together we can realize equality. Together we can insure the fulfillment of all those groups which make up the human reality of Canada.

In 1974, the Quebec Government while pursuing the consolidation of its economic edifice, has nevertheless decided to act irrevocably in social and cultural areas.

The adoption of Bill 22 is the most tangible example of this. If this legislation is seen in its proper light, it will appear as the logical conclusion to the reality of Quebec and of Canada. Since we had no choice in the matter, in other words since we had to act, economic expediency was not our prime concern. We wanted to be moderate, responsive and in keeping with the economic reality.

If there is an economic price to be paid for this decision, we shall pay it without hesitation.

However, I think it would be destructive, irrational and dangerous if businessmen thought for a single moment to punish Quebec for its acceptance of Bill 22.

In 1975, it seems to me obvious that Canada must stand united. Affected as we are by international currents, a serious decrease of the economic growth of any region affects the total well-being of all of us. That is a fact we cannot escape.

Consequently, it appears to me impossible to even consider that rational human beings will exact a price for Bill 22. It would be most foolish economically. Furthermore, it would be quite unjust.

To sum up, Bill 22 does not contradict the principles of our Canadian democracy. It does not diminish the reality of Canada. It is not a challenge to the unity of this country.

It is, as I have tried to convey here, an essential present measure to establish the permanency of a four-hundred-year-old fact in Quebec. It is the basis for a more durable confidence and continuing common purpose in the development of Canada. It seeks to provide a more positive base upon which we can grow together.

Quebec must be able to live with itself-both culturally and economically. But it knows very well that it must also live daily with its fellow Canadians and within the global context of the world of today. Bill 22 intends to make us more secure in our external relationships and, as we progress, even more effective. And if it contributes to resolving our anxieties, it will establish our potential for an even greater contribution to all of Canada. Thank you.

The official thanks of The Empire Club of Canada were expressed by Mr. John Fisher, First VicePresident.