Quebec
Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Calls for Withdrawal of Quebec "Constitution Act"
The Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador (APNQL),
considering that the bill on the Constitution of Quebec (Bill 1) denies
the political status, rights and systems of governance of Indigenous
Peoples, is calling for its immediate withdrawal. This position was
stated during its
presentation before a parliamentary committee on Bill 1 on Thursday,
February 5.
The APNQL also denounced the complete absence of consultations with Indigenous Peoples' governments. It regrets that, despite its repeated efforts, Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette has not engaged in any formal dialogue with Indigenous Peoples. As a result, they have been systematically excluded from all discussions, negotiations, and decisions concerning a bill that directly affects them.
The APNQL further notes that the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) government's approach runs counter to the principles of free, prior, and informed consent recognized by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The notion of Quebec's territorial integrity, invoked in the legislative text, is also contested. By sweeping aside ancestral title, it compromises the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination.
What the Exclusion of the Eagle Staff in Favour of the Royal Mace Means
Representatives
of Indigenous Peoples in Quebec travel to Quebec City to participate in
discussions on the Constitution of Quebec bill, February 5, 2026.
The condescending reception given to the APNQL delegation by the Minister of Justice during the hearing was matched only by the contemptuous act of refusing entry to the National Assembly to members of the delegation carrying an Eagle Staff.
The insulting exclusion of the Eagle Staff shows that the constitutional monarchy of which the National Assembly is a part operates solely through regulations that serve the needs of the royal prerogative rather than those of the people. Refusing to swear allegiance to the King and removing a few crowns from coats of arms does not change the fact that this institution and the cartel parties that make it up are increasingly well-practiced at excluding the people from decision-making power.
Where
power truly resides is illustrated by this description on the National
Assembly website of the mace representing the Crown: "The mace
represents the power to assemble in order to legislate, conferred on
the Assembly by the King or Queen, as well as the authority of the
presidency of the
Assembly. Of large dimensions and made of worked gold, the mace also
symbolizes the power to enforce the constitutional rights of the
Assembly and of parliamentarians against any external threat, a role
entrusted to the Sergeant-at-Arms.
"At each sitting, the President of the Assembly enters, followed by the Sergeant-at-Arms, who carries the mace to the clerks' table. During parliamentary proceedings, for laws adopted to be valid, the mace must remain on this table as long as the President remains in the chair."
As for the chair in the National Assembly chamber where the President sits: "The term 'throne' is given to the ensemble composed of the chair and the structure against which it rests. Like the mace, the throne symbolizes the power of the presidency, which derives from royal power. This is why the same expression is used to designate the place occupied by the King or Queen and by the President. The top of the chair is surmounted by a carved wooden crown that recalls the link with the British monarchy."
The Chief of the APNQL, Francis Verreault-Paul, was right to point out that the committee could, as an exceptional measure, have accepted the Eagle Staff under the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. The fact that it did not do so highlights the limits of this so-called parliamentary sovereignty, which is nothing more than a limited autonomy subject to the legal constraints of the Canadian Constitution and which in no way calls into question where decision-making power truly resides.
This, moreover, is the greatest criticism levelled at Bill 1: it was designed without consulting either the Quebec people or the Indigenous Peoples. The issue of a new constitution and of new arrangements to empower the people arising from genuine dialogue within the political body is the pressing problem that needs to be addressed and resolved.
This article was published in
Volume 56 Number 3 - February 12, 2026
Article Link:
https://cpcml.ca/TML2026/Articles/T560034.HTM
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca