No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
The basic characteristics of Quebec parties and politics have always been somewhat of an unknown quantity in the rest of Canada. The average English-speaking Canadian finds it difficult to appreciate the significance of the issues on which electoral battles are won and lost, the underlying ideology of Quebec parties, and the relationships existing between these parties and those of the rest of Canada. This difficulty is particularly apparent when he focuses his attention on the political developments of the last fifteen years which have resulted in the emergence of the Union Nationale party of Mr. Maurice Duplessis as the dominant party in the province.
It is proposed in this paper to throw some light on this little-known area in the field of Canadian politics by presenting an analysis of the nature of the new party, the factors which have resulted in its rise to power, its relationships with federal parties, and finally the future role it may be expected to play in Quebec politics.
In order to understand the nature of the Union Nationale, and the reason for the dominant position it holds in the political life of the province today, we must analyse its growth against the background of the Nationalist movement which swept the province in the early thirties, and which still is the most important factor in the thinking of the French Canadian. This Nationalist movement had two phases, the first from around 1930 up to 1939, and the second from 1939 to 1948. Examination of the first phase will show the reasons for the birth of the Union Nationale and the nature of the policies for which it stood. Consideration of the second phase will reveal the further stages in the evolution of the party after its defeat in the provincial election of 1939, and the factors entering into its slow but steady progress towards the smashing victory of 1948.
This paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association in Halifax, June 9, 1949.
1 For a description of the respective roles of English and French in the economic life of a typical Quebec industrial town see Hughes, Everett C., French Canada in Transition (Chicago, 1943).Google Scholar
2 This attitude expressed itself not only in a policy of siding with employers against strikers, but also in the enactment of restrictive labour legislation. One such measure was an amendment of the Collective Labour Agreements Extension Act of 1934, which amendment restricted the scope of the Act, and adversely affected the power of the unions to make collective contracts.
3 Canada, House of Commons Debates, June 16, 1942.
4 See statement of Mr.King, , Canada, House of Commons Debates, Special War Session, 09 8, 1939.Google Scholar
5 As reported in Le Devoir, Oct. 10, 1939.
6 An examination of vhe plebiscite figures by provinces indicates that while the rest of Canada voted 79 per cent “Yes,” Quebec voted 71 per cent “No.” See “Statement of the results of the Plebiscite held on the 27th day of April, 1942,” The Canada Gazette, no. 413, vol. LXXV, 06 23, 1942.Google Scholar
7 Although this party won only four seats, it polled large votes in many other constituencies where there were three-way contests.
8 All five seats were in the Montreal area. They were Outremont, St. Louis, Westmount-St. George, Verdun, and Notre Dame de Graces.
9 The following members of the provincial cabinet appeared on the platform for the Conservative party: Antonio Barrette, minister of labour, Camille Pouliot, minister of fish and game, Paul Sauve, minister of youth.
10 One such proposal was a provincial labour code submitted to the legislature at the opening of the 1949 session. One of the most controversial aspects of this code was a clause setting up a Labour Relations Board with sweeping powers to make decisions as to what unions were to be certified. Uncertified unions would be prohibited from striking. The bill raised a storm of protest from practically every labour union in the province. In addition the Quebec Clerical Social Study Commission, an organization backed by the Roman Catholic hierarchy of the province, condemned the code as “not meeting the present requirements of social justice.” In the face of this pressure, Mr. Duplessis decided to shelve the controversial bill for the time being.