If Quebec’s National Assembly adopts legislation by Friday to make swearing an oath to the king optional, other Canadian provinces or other Commonwealth states may want to do the same.
• Read more: [EN IMAGES] Returning to the door of the Blue Chamber, the PQ will not sit down before revoking the oath to the King.
• Read more: PQ denied in the Blue Room: World media is talking about it
Jean-Francois Roberge, the minister in charge of democratic institutions, tabled his bill on Tuesday to end the compulsory oath to Charles III.
“Quebec’s leadership has been expressed often throughout history. Once again, I think we are marking the times,” welcomed Mr. Roberge.
Screenshot TVA News
Jean-Francois Roberge, the minister in charge of democratic institutions, was applauded by all deputies after tabling his bill to end the mandatory oath to the king in the Blue Room on Tuesday. He expressed hope that his bill would be passed by Friday with the cooperation of opposition parties.
“Others may be inspired by us, but I don’t do it for the sake of it, I do it precisely because my total and absolute loyalty is to Quebecers,” he continued.
The domino effect
This is what PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon believes, as he, like his colleagues Pascal Bérubé and Joël Arseneau, cannot sit in the Blue Room because they are not formally sworn to the king.
- Listen to an interview with Jean-François Roberge, Minister responsible for Democratic Institutions, on QUB Radio:
“Once Quebec gets rid of the oath to the king, we’ll see other Canadian provinces do the same. […] It is very possible that it will have a domino effect,” said the leader of the Parti Québécois.
Analysis shared by constitutional expert Patrick Taylan. “It will encourage other provinces to want to do the same,” commented the full professor at Laval University’s Faculty of Law.
Quebec can also serve as an inspiration beyond our borders. “It will be talked about in the Commonwealth”, the constitutionalist believes.
“A country like Australia, for example, which has already held a referendum on abolition and has had a very mature public opinion on abolishing the monarchy for a long time, may want to say something good. In the meantime we will at least make this gesture,” Mr. Tailon said.
A “very clean” bill
The law filed on Tuesday has only two articles, if not one, the second only mentions the date the amendment will take effect, i.e. its approval.
“They can’t do that for a while. It’s really, really neat,” Mr. Taylon observed.
Section 1 amends the Constitution Act of 1867 to ensure that the mandatory oath of allegiance to the British monarch no longer applies in Quebec.
On a technical level, the Legault government continued in the same way in its Bill 96 in French, or adopted a law replacing the old law.
“This is very legally binding,” Minister Roberge told the Parliamentary Press. He expressed hope of passing his bill by Friday.
We feel that we have the support of all parties, said the minister.
“We will cooperate and it will be adopted on Friday,” interim Liberal leader Mark Tanguay promised Tuesday morning. […] The caucus has taken a common position that will be common to all. »
Personally, once the law was amended, Mr. Tanguay wants to accept the pledge of the people of Quebec.
What Bill 4 Says
An Act to recognize the oath given in the Act respecting the National Assembly as the only compulsory oath for sitting in it.
Explanatory notes
- The purpose of the bill was to abolish the obligation to take and subscribe to the King’s oath of allegiance, which was provided for in the Constitution Act, 1867, and which required members to meet in order to sit in the National Assembly.
- To this end, the Bill adds a clause to the Constitution Act, 1867 exempting Quebec from the application of section 128 of that Act, which provides for such an obligation.
The Parliament of Quebec decrees as follows:
1 – The Constitution Act, 1867, is amended by inserting after section 128 the following: “128Q.1. Section 128 does not apply in Quebec. »
Final arrangement
2 – This Act comes into force (insert date of passage of this Act here).
