By Brian Mulroney

To be sure, things look pretty bad in Quebec. We have gone through six premiers in nine years. Unemployment is at least three pre-centage points higher here than the national average. A separatist party with a talented leader is in full flight and a movement dedicated to French unilingualism has promised "50 St. Leonards".

The sounds of exploding bombs have become almost common place 'and the sight of students occupying and pillaging a university is served up to us on the 11 o'clock news. There is confrontation in Ottawa and flirtation in Paris; there is unrest in the CEGEPS and instability in Quebec City. In the face of it all, any reasonable man would quite properly consider packing his bags and getting out. The problem is: "where to?". In the United States, leaders are shot in the streets.

The most powerful nation in the world watches poverty and despair grow in 20 million -black Americans while it spends $30 billion a year on a land war 10,000 miles away. There is violence and insecurity and thoughtful men fear for the future of their republic. In France, the government is brought to its knees by workers and students. The shape of democracy persists while the substance diminishes. In Britain, the pound is under unremitting attack and the nation, still proud but now uninspired, contemplates its lost glory and its unpromising future.

And so it goes. In this perspective, it seems to me that our own problems right here in Quebec and Canada take on more realistic dimensions. In the last seven or eight years, many of us have been so preoccupied contemplating our own navels that we sometimes forget that other places are coming to grips with problems more urgent and more complex than ours. We have been brought to this point by Canadians who call themselves separatists. Their dream is of an independent nation-state within the frontiers of the province of Quebec.

Marcel Chaput, the Father of Contemporary Separatists, once observed that "French Canadians are the best treated minority in the world". "The problem", he said, "is just that we no longer wish to be a minority". It is difficult to deal with a statement like that, except perhaps by recalling the words of Albert Schweitzer to the effect that: "Nationalism is patriotism stripped of all its nobility."  Because when you get right down to it, what separatists are selling is pure nationalism, because it's all they have to sell.

The separatist case is predicated, in part, on the assumption that people of French origin must live alone, work alone and study alone in their own self-interests; that unless this is done within the confines of a separate political entity possessed of all the powers of a sovereign state, time and events will cause French Canadians to disappear as an effective group. In my view, the assumption is fallacious and the argument fundamentally wrong. There is no valid historical precedent for any such contention nor is there any criterion which enables a thoughtful individual to advance the thesis.

From 60,000 in 1759, French Canadians have grown to over 5.5 million today in one of the truly great examples of survival and "epa-nouissement" in history. With minor exceptions, Quebec's economic growth has been steady and occasionally spectacular. Generations have come and gone, have contributed to an increasing prosperity and have shared in it, without bloodshed or disruption of their lives. Today, Quebecers along with all other Canadians enjoy a standard of living second in the world only to that of the Americans. The parliamentary system in Quebec has produced the longest, uninterrupted period of political stability enjoyed by a French or Latin government in history.

As part of the North American Community, Quebec has been transformed into a vigorous industrialized province with massive plants, blast furnaces and Hydro development at almost every turn of the road. One is constantly impressed though not overwhelmed by the proliferation of business, the improving quality of education and the abundance of culture. From farmers and laborers, (and I come from a people that knows something of both occupations) French Canadians like all others have walked the long road to success in industry and science and finance. In a national survey last year, MacLean's Magazine ranked Université de Montreal and Laval as Nos. 2 and 3 in a list of the best Canadian universities.

When doctors and lawyers and priests were once their only graduates, these universities are now spawning thousands of economists, businessmen, engineers and technicians annually who rank with the best in North America. Now these people need jobs and opportunity. In boardrooms today, the voices of Paul Desmarais, Jean Louis Levesque, Louis Lapointe and Marc Carriere speak with the same authority as the Peter Thomsons, The E. P. Taylor’s the Bud MacDougall’s and the Sam Bronfman’s.

Anyone who has visited the giant Manicouagan 5 complex comes away amazed by the brilliant and sophisticated techniques of engineering developed and implemented by French Canadian engineers at the world's second largest Hydro development.

In the public service, the record of French Canadians is equally distinguished. Canada has had French Canadians as Governor-General, Prime Minister, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Chief of the Armed Forces and in just about every other important job in the country. In the past, much of this, was tokenism but' the situation is radically changed today.

I believe that Mr. (Pierre) Trudeau's main accomplishment so far is that he has brought French Canadians into the mainstream of the decision-making process in Ottawa. This was long overdue and is a far cry from the days when not one major portfolio was held by a French Canadian and the only French Canadians on the Prime Minister's staff were, a male secretary, a female stenographer and a confidential messenger.

But all of these facts leave the separatists. cold and unimpressed. Of necessity, separatists have become apostles of negativism. On the wings of eloquence and in the name of nationalism, they hope to induce a collective feeling of inferiority and oppression in French Canada. If this could be accomplished and made to coincide with some economic decline of major proportions, they would then be ready with the magic formula: separation.

Separate and all will be well. Indispensable to the success of the separatist case is the further assumption that, way down deep, French Canadians do not want to be Canadians; that given the choice, they would opt for Quebec. That this is so in certain cases is decidedly true. That a charismatic leader could increase separatist support from nine percent to double that size, may also be true.

But that a significant proportion, let alone a majority of French Canadians would be willing to trade in their citizenship for a glossy slogan and an uncertain future this I do not believe for a moment. There is another dimension, the real injustices suffered by French Canadians in the past. It would be less than honest if I failed to note that many of these continue today.

Consider the item of language rights outside Quebec: A French-Canadian student in Moncton, New Brunswick is told by the Courts that he is not entitled to be heard or defended in his own language and this in a province which is some 40 French. Imagine the Pan-Canadian outrage if this happened to an English Canadian in, say, Rimouski.

Consider the item of veiled discrimination in the public service and the Canadian business community. Professor John Porter's book, The Vertical Mosaic, shows just how difficult it is for a non-WASP to succeed in either field and until recently at least, how few have in fact made it.

Consider the unfairness of a system that, allows English Canadians the right to an excellent education in Quebec the aberration, of St. Leonard notwithstanding, but denies French Canadians similar rights elsewhere.

Consider the disparities in wages and opportunities as catalogued in a study for the recent B & B report which places the French-Canadian group along with the Italians at the bottom of the economic heap even today right here in Montreal.

Consider these items and many others.

I am saddened to have to admit that in many instances, including some to which I referred tonight, French Canadians have succeeded in Canada not because of the system, but in spite of it.

What does the future hold for English speaking Quebecers? My guess is "plenty" if we accept to play a larger role in the life of this province. I think this can be done in many ways. For example, why don't we consider the notion of having English students spend at least the first four years of their 12 or 16 or 20-years academic careers studying in French. For my money, this is the best, if not the only way, to produce the type of bilingual Quebecers this province and this country need. To be sure, there are legal and practical obstacles at present but I firmly believe it is an attainable goal and one we should shoot for.

Most people marvel at Mr. Trudeau's bilingualism and with good reason but he didn't just wake up one morning and find himself so endowed. He worked at it and that is precisely what all of us must do. English speaking Quebecers should participate more actively in the public service of this province and some of our university graduates should look at the opportunities on Grande Allee as well as those on St. James Street.

To the best of my knowledge, there is not one English speaking deputy minister in Quebec at this moment, with the exception of an associate deputy minister for English education) and very few influential civil servants of English background. And yet, that is where the decisions are made every day that affect every aspect of our lives. Many invitations have been extended but very few have been accepted.

The English-speaking community in Quebec has placed itself in the rather invidious position of having plenty of taxation but no representation! There should also be a greater degree of participation by the English-speaking community in both major political parties. To be sure, a party must be worthy of one's support and in the past, the National Union party has had a dubious record on occasion in this regard.

But we must be careful never to vote according to a Pavlovian reflex because it engenders an unhealthy situation where one party is consistently deprived of English support and advice while the other takes both for granted.

Finally, there should be a greater sharing of economic power. This is a grey area because what one does with one's own money is his own business. But is it? It seems to me that university recruitment, hiring practices generally, promotions within corporations, portfolio investments and so on all should be geared at least in part towards a greater degree of integration of French Canadians into positions of active command in the business community. Apart from the obvious reasons of justice and decency which militate in favor of this course of action, it is important for every man to remember that the sharing of economic power also precludes the possibility of forcing French Canadians to live apart and to work apart simply because they have been stymied on the way in.

James Joyce once observed that "the past is consumed in the present and the present is alive only because it gives birth to the future." What we do with that future is, of course, entirely up to all of us.

For almost a decade now, the Great Canadian Debate has gone on. It seems to me that the time has come at all levels of government and in the various components of our society for meaning to be breathed into words and positive action substituted for promises and good will. If we fail, the problem so accurately defined by Messrs. Laurendeau and Dunton may well overcome us all. If we succeed, Mr.

Levesque's movement is as dead as a doornail.