There has long been an important dialogue between competing ideas that aim to describe the composition of Canadian society and to determine whether there are significant political implications. This has been particularly divisive when considering whether the Province of Quebec should be formally recognized as a distinct society. Never mind the disagreement between the concepts involved, even the semantics of the exact wording used have been subject to raging debates (province or nation or people or citizens or community or society?).

We feel that uni.ca has a significant position to offer that is useful, consistent, true, and represents a balanced synthesis of many of the most prevalent thoughts in this area. The basic premise is that this is not a zero-sum situation, and that recognition of one part of Canada does not somehow diminish the importance of other parts. We can recognize and celebrate the beauty of Canada's national unity while recognizing and celebrating the contribution of its constitutive elements.

In the furtherance of promoting Canadian unity, uni.ca advocates the inclusion of two interpretive clauses in the Constitution of Canada:

1. a clause recognizing the national social composition; and,
2. a clause recognizing the vital role of Quebec in French Canada and in Canada as a whole.

A clause recognizing the national social composition of Canada:

"Canada is one country and one society, formed by the interaction of three unique and open societies:

• French-speaking
• English-speaking
• Aboriginal

Nothing in this section derogates from the promotion of multiculturalism in Canada."

It is important for us to make a few fundamental points concerning the semantics and meaning of this statement. The societies conceived here are best interpreted as social frameworks within which Canadians operate on a daily basis. They are "open" since most Canadians can access the society and one can change or operate in more than one.

A practical example would be a Greek immigrant moving to Calgary or Chicoutimi. On a daily basis, they would be operating in either the French-speaking or English-speaking societies. Interaction with other Canadians is mediated through this social underpinning. Of course, they may also interact in a Greek community, but this is on a different level from the grand social framework of Canada as a whole. There are many constitutive communities based on ethnicity, occupation, religion, and other specific elements of individual and collective identity, that operate within the larger framework.

So, the first point to highlight is that, generally speaking, most Canadians may access and be part of these societies, regardless of their ethnic or linguistic background.

Second, there are vast areas of similarity between these three societies, but the differences are, nonetheless, significant. Appropriate social and business behaviour, methods of greeting, the general cultural milieu, and a host of other small differences add up to a collective effect on the interaction between Canadians. We have chosen to emphasize the linguistic component, as this is a fundamental element that carries many other social particularities.

Some people have chosen to focus on the differences between Canadians. We feel that this clause can represent the wonderful Canadian oxymoron of similarity and unity within diversity. The similarities between these three societies are much greater than the differences. A general orientation towards peaceful cooperation, a desire for balanced social and economic progress, the rule of law and the people, equality of persons, and so on, have long provided a basis for these three societies to come together and form something greater than themselves.

Perhaps more importantly, these societies have also evolved alongside each other, accentuating our similarities. They have each influenced social developments in the others to the extent that it would be difficult to propose that any of the three would be the same today were it not for the existence of the other two. These three societies are bound together at a fundamental level, at both the root of societal formation and through the dialogue of national synthesis. These are three unique societies that are distinct but not delineated or detached.

A final point to underscore is that there is nothing here that says this is, or should be, how it will be for all time. Collectives which are now best described as communities - whether they are based on ethnicity, language, or something else - may one day also become significant societal frameworks which should be recognized as such.

In a related theme, there are entities within the national social framework which also have a noteworthy influence on social evolution. To consider one case in particular, Quebec plays a noticeable and supportive role in the French-speaking society. As part of the positive recognition of this fact, uni.ca advocates the inclusion of the following interpretive clause in the Canadian Constitution:

A clause recognizing Quebec

"We recognize that Québec plays a vital role in the Canadian Federation's continuing commitment to ensuring a strong voice for French Canada. As such, the Province of Québec requires constitutional recognition in an interpretive clause to meet this reality and responsibility. This recognition does not derogate from the roles of other political entities or any other constitutional obligation. Federal and Provincial entities or any other constitutional obligation. Federal and Provincial Governments will remain committed to their responsibilities for minority rights."

One of the most important nuances to note is that "Quebec plays a vital role", allowing for other entities to also play a role. We have always felt that the ultimate responsibility for the promotion of French Canada lies with the Federal Government, as it is the only pan-Canadian political agent. However, that does not preclude collaborative support from other partners, such as provincial governments, particularly those of Quebec and New Brunswick. This is a shared responsibility in a positive sum framework where mandates may be overlapping and are not mutually exclusive.

We also have chosen to note that "Quebec" plays a vital, role, but that the "Province of Quebec" is the political entity that is best suited for constitutional recognition. There may be many versions of what is "Quebec", and all of them are important for French Canada but are not necessarily synonymous with the provincial government.

The words "reality and responsibility" are central to this clause. First, we are stating a reality: it is a simple fact that Quebec is important for French Canada and for all of Canada. Whether social, cultural, and political initiatives are specifically designed for French Canadians outside of the province, developments in Quebec echo across the country, and, indeed, the world. As a result, Quebec has a special responsibility in this area, and this should be recognized.

Summary

The recognition of what constitutes Canadian society is a vital building block for continued social cohesion. It is fundamentally about respect. Societal descriptions are rarely perfect and clear, with many practical examples that challenge general statements. Things may also change over time. Today, we feel that Canada is one whole with three identifiable and noteworthy components, and this will be the case for the foreseeable future. We also feel that Quebec plays a special role in regards to one of these components, the French-speaking society. We propose that both of these facts be recognized and, most importantly, that this social reality is positive. It deserves to be recognized, promoted, and celebrated.