Grade by Grade
D. Canada, 1945–1982 · Canada, 1945–1982

From the October Crisis to the 1980 Referendum

D3.4 D2.1 D1.5 A1.5 A1.6About 70 minutes
Learning goals
  • I can describe the October Crisis and the federal government's use of the War Measures Act.
  • I can evaluate whether the War Measures Act was justified, using evidence and perspectives.
  • I can explain Bill 101 and different perspectives on it.
  • I can describe the 1980 referendum and explain its results and consequences.

Words to know

FLQ
Front de libération du Québec, a small group that used violence to seek an independent socialist Quebec.
War Measures Act
A law that gave the federal government emergency powers, including arrests without charges; used in peacetime only in 1970.
civil liberties
Basic freedoms such as freedom from arbitrary arrest, and freedom of speech and assembly.
manifesto
A public statement of a group's goals and beliefs.
Bill 101
The Charter of the French Language (1977), which made French the main public language of Quebec.
referendum
A vote by citizens on a single question.
renewed federalism
Trudeau's 1980 promise to change the Constitution and the federal system if Quebecers voted No.

Before we begin

This lesson includes political violence: bombings, kidnappings and the death of a Quebec cabinet minister. It is presented factually so you can understand how Canadians and their governments responded. Throughout the lesson you will practise historical perspective: understanding why people at the time made the choices they did, even if you might judge them differently today.

The FLQ

Most Quebecers who wanted sovereignty worked through democratic means: writing, organizing, voting. A very small group did not. The Front de libération du Québec (FLQ), formed in 1963, wanted to make Quebec an independent, socialist country through violence. From 1963 to 1970 its members set off dozens of bombs, in mailboxes, at armed forces buildings and at the Montreal Stock Exchange (1969). Several people were killed and many injured.

Almost all Quebec nationalists, including René Lévesque, condemned FLQ violence.

The October Crisis, 1970

  • On October 5, 1970, an FLQ cell kidnapped James Cross, a British diplomat in Montreal. The kidnappers demanded the release of FLQ prisoners, money, and the broadcast of their manifesto, which was read on Radio-Canada.
  • On October 10, another FLQ cell kidnapped Pierre Laporte, Quebec's Minister of Labour.
  • Asked by a reporter how far he would go, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau answered, "Just watch me."
  • On October 15, at the Quebec government's request, soldiers were sent into Montreal and other places.
  • At 4 a.m. on October 16, after requests from Quebec Premier Robert Bourassa and Montreal Mayor Jean Drapeau, the federal government proclaimed the War Measures Act. It was the only time the Act was used in peacetime. Membership in the FLQ became a crime, and police could arrest and hold people without charges.
  • Police arrested about 500 people. Most were never charged with any crime; many were artists, writers, union activists and PQ supporters.
  • On October 17, Laporte was found dead.
  • On December 3, police found Cross. In exchange for his release, his kidnappers were flown to Cuba. Laporte's kidnappers were arrested later in December and convicted.
The October Crisis, 1970Oct. 5FLQ kidnapsJames CrossOct. 10FLQ kidnapsPierre LaporteOct. 16War MeasuresAct proclaimedOct. 17Laporte founddeadDec. 3Cross freed;kidnappersgo to Cuba
Each step pushed the next. The government's use of the War Measures Act came after two kidnappings and before Laporte's death.

Was the War Measures Act justified?

This is one of the most debated questions in Canadian history.

  • Supporters at the time (polls showed a large majority of Canadians, including in Quebec) said the government faced an unknown threat: two kidnappings, years of bombings, and fears of a wider uprising. Bourassa and Drapeau had asked for help.
  • Critics, including NDP leader Tommy Douglas, said it was like "using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut". They argued that hundreds of innocent people lost their civil liberties, that the FLQ was tiny, and that ordinary police powers were enough.
  • Later evidence showed that the FLQ was small and that no uprising was planned. Many historians now judge that the response went much further than the threat required, while others stress how uncertain things looked in October 1970.

In 1988, the War Measures Act was replaced by the Emergencies Act, which includes stronger protections for rights.

Language laws and the PQ in power

After the crisis, the debate over Quebec's future moved back into elections and laws.

  • Bill 22 (1974): Bourassa's Liberal government made French the official language of Quebec and limited access to English schools for children of immigrants.
  • November 15, 1976: the Parti Québécois, led by René Lévesque, won the Quebec election. Many English Canadians were shocked.
  • Bill 101 (1977), the Charter of the French Language: made French the language of government, courts, work and business in Quebec. Commercial signs had to be in French only. Children of newcomers had to go to French schools (English schools were mainly for children whose parents had been educated in English in Quebec).

Perspectives: most francophone Quebecers supported Bill 101 as necessary to protect French in a continent of English speakers, especially since many immigrants had been choosing English schools. Many English-speaking Quebecers felt their rights and community were under attack; tens of thousands left Quebec, and some companies moved their head offices to Toronto. Many immigrant families resented being told which schools their children must attend.

The 1980 referendum

On May 20, 1980, the PQ government held a referendum. It asked Quebecers to give the government a mandate to negotiate sovereignty-association with Canada. The Yes side was led by Lévesque. The No side was led by Quebec Liberal leader Claude Ryan, with strong help from Trudeau and his Justice Minister Jean Chrétien.

Near the end of the campaign, Trudeau promised that a No vote would lead to renewed federalism: changes to the Constitution. About 85 percent of eligible voters cast a ballot. The result: 59.56% No, 40.44% Yes. Lévesque told his supporters, "À la prochaine fois" ("Until next time").

Trudeau's promise led directly to his push to patriate the Constitution, which you will study in the final lesson of this unit. Quebec's government would refuse to sign it, which kept the debate alive long after 1982.

Quebec referendum on sovereignty-association, May 20, 1980No59.56%Yes40.44%About 85 percent of eligible voters took part.
The No side won clearly, but 4 in 10 voters chose Yes. The question of Quebec's future was not settled.
Quebec and Canada, 1963–19821960196519701975198019851963first FLQ bombs1970October Crisis1974Bill 221976PQ elected1977Bill 1011980referendum1981Quebec left outof deal
From the first FLQ bombs to the 1981 constitutional deal, drawn to scale. Notice that after 1970 the struggle moved into democratic channels: elections, laws and a referendum.
Worked example

Modelled example: Analysing an event from multiple perspectives

Analyse Bill 101 (1977) from three perspectives.

  1. A francophone Montreal parent: French was in danger in Montreal because most newcomers chose English schools; Bill 101 guarantees that French will be the common public language and that her children can work in French.
  2. An anglophone Quebecer whose family has lived in Montreal for generations: the law limits English signs and schooling and makes her feel like an outsider in her own home; she wonders whether to move to Ontario.
  3. An immigrant parent from Italy who arrived in 1978: he wanted his children to learn English for North American opportunities, but they must go to French school; he feels he was not consulted.
  4. Historian's step: explain why each person sees the law differently (language, history, goals), and then judge the law's consequences using evidence: French did become the main public language in Quebec, and many anglophones left.

A strong analysis presents each perspective fairly, explains the reasons behind it and then reaches a judgement based on evidence, without simply choosing a side.

Hands-on activity

Role-play a referendum debate

You need: paper, a pencil and one or two family members.

  1. Each person chooses a role: a Yes supporter in 1980 (for example, a young francophone teacher), a No supporter (for example, a francophone federal public servant), or an undecided voter.
  2. Each person writes three arguments that their character would have made in 1980, using facts from this unit (the Quiet Revolution, Bill 101, the economy, renewed federalism, language).
  3. Hold a 10-minute debate. The undecided voter asks questions and then explains how they would vote and why.
  4. Afterwards, step out of role and write one paragraph: What did I learn about historical perspective from arguing a view that may not be my own?

What to look for: arguments rooted in 1980 (not today), respectful tone, and a reflection that explains how context shaped people's views.

Your turn

1

What was the FLQ, and what methods did it use?

2

Who were the two people kidnapped in October 1970?

3

What powers did the War Measures Act give police?

4

Give one argument for and one against using the War Measures Act in 1970.

5

What did Bill 101 require?

6

What were the results of the 1980 referendum?

7

What did Trudeau promise during the referendum campaign?

More practice: warm-up

1

What did Trudeau say when asked how far he would go?

2

Which Quebec premier asked for the War Measures Act?

3

When did the PQ win its first election?

4

Who led the No side in 1980 as Quebec Liberal leader?

5

What replaced the War Measures Act in 1988?

More practice: on your own

1

Why did Tommy Douglas compare the War Measures Act to "using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut"?

2

Why might polls in 1970 have shown strong support for the War Measures Act, while many historians later criticized it?

3

Explain one cause and one consequence of Bill 101.

4

Why did Lévesque say "À la prochaine fois" after losing?

5

How did the 1980 referendum lead to patriation?

Challenge

1

Write a thesis answering: "Was the federal government's response to the October Crisis justified?" Address at least one counter-argument.

2

Compare the FLQ and the PQ: both wanted Quebec sovereignty. Explain why historians treat them so differently.

3

Assess the historical significance of the 1980 referendum for Canada.

Check your understanding

Quiz

1.

What triggered the October Crisis of 1970?

2.

What did the War Measures Act allow in 1970?

3.

About how many people were arrested under the War Measures Act?

4.

What did Bill 101 (1977) do?

5.

What was the result of the 1980 referendum?

6.

Which is the best example of a democratic path to sovereignty?

For parents and teachers

Big idea: Students describe the causes and consequences of key events in Quebec after the Quiet Revolution, including the October Crisis, the founding and election of the PQ, Bill 101 and the 1980 referendum (D3.4), analyse them as social and political conflict from multiple perspectives (D2.1), and evaluate a government policy, the War Measures Act (D1.5). The skill is historical perspective (A1.5).

Sensitive content: The lesson mentions bombings, kidnappings and the death of Pierre Laporte factually and without graphic detail. There is no joke block in this lesson.

How to help: Do the role-play together. Insist that arguments come from 1980, not from today. Ask: "Why do you think most Canadians supported the War Measures Act in 1970, and why do many historians criticize it now?"

Common difficulties:

  • Treating all sovereigntists as the FLQ. Most used democratic means and condemned violence.
  • Getting the referendum question wrong: it asked for a mandate to negotiate sovereignty-association, not for immediate independence.
  • Forgetting that Bourassa and Drapeau requested federal action.