UNI320Y: Canadian Questions: Issues and Debates

Week 11: Differentiated Citizenship?

Professor Emily Gilberthttp://individual.utoronto.ca/emilygilbert/

Differentiated Citizenship?

I. The Citizenship Regime

II. Differentiated Citizenship

III. Transnational Action

I: Citizenship Regime “the institutional arrangements, rules,

and understandings that guide and shape concurrent policy decisions and expenditures of states, problem definitions by states and citizens, and claims making by citizens” (Jenson and Papillon: 246)

Citizenship regime

1) Boundaries of inclusion and exclusion: formal recognition of rights and ability to exercise those rights

2) Democratic rules of the game: institutional rules, modes of participation, and claims making

3) Definition of the nation: nationality and national identity

4) Sets the geographical borders of the political community

New citizenship regime after 1945 Economy Politics Culture Social policy National identity Equity and distribution

II: Differentiated Citizenship

Will Kymlicka, CRC in Political Philosophy, Queen’s U

Multicultural Odysseys: Navigating the New International Politics of Diversity (2007; Oxford)

Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, Citizenship (2001; Oxford)

Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ethnocultural Relations in Canada (1998; Oxford)

Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (1995; Oxford)

Liberalism, Community, and Culture (1989; Oxford)

The “accommodation of difference is the essence of true equality” – Supreme Court of Canada

Canada A multination state

English, French, Aboriginal poeoples A polyethnic state

Three forms of group-differentiated citizenship Self-government rights

Neogitated through federalism and reserves Polyethnic rights

Protection of cultural particularity and pride Special representation rights

Marginalized groups and regions

Individual vs. group rights

Right of a group against larger society External protections

Right of a group against its own members Internal restrictions

Provisions for external protections do not lead to domination, but equal footing

Do not restrict individual rights Internal restrictions are to be avoided

Social unity

Demand for representation and polyethnic rights as a demand for inclusion

But which groups are represented, and by whom?

Self-government as weakening the bonds with larger community

Intergovernmental bodies, but not federal bodies Potential for dual citizenship

But denial of self-government can lead to increased sense of alienation, desire for secession

III: James Bay Cree (Eeyouch)

1) 1970s: action against hydroelectric development and 1975 James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement

2) 1988: opposition to James Bay II3) 1990s: mobilization in national unity

debate

1970s: Proposed James Bay development No political consultation with Aboriginal people: 5,000 Cree

and 3,500 Inuit 1971: chiefs of 8 bands come together Mounted judicial challenge and court injunction; asserts

legal obligation to negotiate treaty 1974: Grand Council of the Crees created 1975: James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement

Land settlement: 170,000 km² 250 million dollars compensation

1986: contruction of first stage completed

1980s: James Bay II 1986: proposal to dam and reroute Grande-

Baleine River: 3 power plants, and flooding 1,700 km2

1987: Matthew Coon Come elected as grand chief and Chair of Grand Council of Crees

Attempts to stop project for environmental reasons Aim is to advance Cree right for self-governance (and

not just Aboriginal title) Used courts to force Hydro-Quebec to undertake

environmental evaluation Mobilization of public in northeastern US Identity claims as Eeyouch, and Eeyou Astchee

1990s: Constitutional Politics 14 Nov 1994: Parizeau’s government

announces Great Whale project on hold Cree concerns about Quebec sovereignty

Fiduciary responsibility of federal government Anglophone population Claims to Quebec as ancestral lands

Cree consultative referendum

21st Century: 2002: Agreement Concerning a New Relationship (Paix

des Braves) signed 70% of Cree supported agreement in a referendum Nation-to-nation agreement: recognized in Preamble More revenue-sharing and joint management of mining,

forestry and hydroelectric resources – and employment Paves way for final James Bay project: Eastmain-1 power

station

2004: agreement signed for joint environmental assessment of the Rupert River Diversion

2007: construction begins on Rupert River Diversion

Transnational action: weak because still oriented through nation-state

Importance of naming1) Generates strategic resources2) Sets discursive boundaries3) Locates communities in relationship to one

another4) Consequences for routing of claims through

state institutions

Cree activism leads to

1) Claims for recognition of collective rights and participation in public debate (eg Charter recognition)

2) National identity claims and idea of multicultural nation

3) Questions regarding national borders and a divisible Canada

4) Legitimacy of democratic rules as only provincial-federal dynamic