Levesque: The Dynamism of Change

Chain-smoking as always, Quebec Premier Rene Levesque perched on the edge of an easy chair in the annex to his Quebec City office as he talked with TIME Ottawa Bureau Chief John M. Scott and Staff Writer George Russell. Excerpts from the interview:

Q. Quebec's situation is unlikely to be resolved soon. What lies five years ahead?

A. Progressively, there's a dynamic of change taking over in Canada and Quebec, and that will not stop. If we're not there in 1983, we're going to be very close to a new setup which would incorporate a new Quebec, more self-governing than other entities in Canada, and to a chance to revamp the rest of Canada. Personally, I think we're going to win the referendum. The margin I don't think will be that much, but one thing could emerge. There could be a very strong majority of the 81 % French population in Quebec, which could be diminished by a bloc vote on the English-speaking side.

Q. Do you. see any chance that the Quebec situation could lead to violence?

A. Canadian democracy and Quebec democracy are strong enough to go through a democratic process of change. Constitutions are never written for eternity, even though we think of them that way. In the case of Britain and the [American] colonies, when the time came, the time came. It wasn't written anywhere, but that's the way it should be.

Q. What do you mean by a "more self-governing Quebec"?

A. We mean political independence in the sense of having all the essential equipment that has to do, for instance, with population balance. That takes in immigration and language legislation. It also takes in the tax base and public revenue, full responsibility for internal development, and full responsibility for anything that has to do with foreign relations.

Q. If the referendum fails, will you discuss constitutional change within Canada?

A. I wouldn't buy it. If eventually Quebec should go back to a sort of patch-up job of an obsolete system, by that time I think I'd be retired anyway. There's no halfway house in a federal system. You're either out or you're in, and the rest is patch-up.

Q. Are you concerned by the flight of business from Montreal?

A. We are worried in the short term because it is part of a poisonous climate that is being maintained in great part by our own English-speaking media and by federal propaganda. Longer term, I think [the flight of business] is a promising trend. You have to go through breaking some eggs before the omelet appears. I'm not talking about industrial operations and their profits. I'm talking about people who, under a federal system, can come in from the outside, pick up our savings and ignore the majority around them. As long as we are under the present setup, we're exposed to blackmail by those bastards, and we're exposed to destabilizing intentions.

Q. What about the problem of an independent Quebec separating the Maritime Provinces from the rest of Canada?

A. Alaska, after all, is part of the American union, and yet has about 1,100 miles of Canada between it and the continental U.S. It hasn't been considered something impossible that 1,100 miles of a foreign country can still allow for free flow and good connections.

Q. Would a sovereign Quebec honor its defense commitments?

A. We'd certainly be able to carry much of the load we're carrying now, and it would be more productive. We pay our share of the Canadian defense freight. It doesn't have much fallout in Quebec. We could afford to shoulder as much of the load as we're shouldering now, and if we had to, it would be a lot more stimulating, because at least we'd get the economic benefit from it. My personal opinion is that it would be completely nutty not to keep the normal, basic Western ties, including NATO.

Q. Your government is perceived abroad as leftwing. What is your response?

A. The times call for some reassessment of the interchange between private and community interest. The absolute lordship of private interests has had its day, and will have to adapt to a mixed system. That's eventually going to be true in the U.S. as well as elsewhere.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.