Quebec to Release 1995 Referendum Files

Summary#

• This bill sets a clear process to publish documents from Bernard Grenier’s 2006–2007 investigation into Option Canada’s activities during the 1995 Quebec referendum.

• It creates a special committee of the National Assembly to decide which documents (or parts) must stay confidential, with a strong tilt toward making most records public.

• Creates a five‑member special parliamentary committee to review all documents covered by Grenier’s 2007 non‑disclosure order.

• By default, documents become public when the committee files its final report; keeping any document confidential requires all members to agree.

• The Chief Electoral Officer (Québec’s election chief) must send all the documents to the President of the National Assembly, who safeguards them and gives the committee confidential access.

• The committee may hire a special advisor to recommend what should stay confidential.

• If the committee needs more than six months, it must report progress and the Assembly will set a new deadline.

• Any document kept confidential now must be released to the public 25 years after the law takes effect.

• People cannot sue just because facts about them are revealed under this law.

• The law allows release even if other access, privacy, or secrecy rules would normally block it.

What it means for you#

• General public and voters

  • Expect more transparency about what happened around the 1995 referendum. Most documents should be released once the committee finishes.
  • Some parts may be blacked out or withheld if releasing them could seriously harm a person or go against the public interest.

• People named in the files

  • Your name or actions could be made public. To keep something confidential, every committee member must agree.
  • If some items are kept secret now, they will still be released 25 years after the law takes effect.
  • You cannot file a civil lawsuit just because facts about you were disclosed under this law.

• Journalists, researchers, and historians

  • You will gain access to a large set of documents from the Grenier investigation once the committee reports.
  • Material that stays confidential must be released after 25 years, ensuring eventual full public access.

• Public bodies

  • Chief Electoral Officer: must transfer the documents to the President of the National Assembly and explain, if needed, why some should stay confidential.
  • National Assembly: will store the records securely, support the committee’s review, and later publish the approved documents.

• Taxpayers

  • Running a small special committee and publishing documents will add some administrative costs, but no figures are provided.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• The public has a right to know more about how the referendum campaign was run; this process increases transparency.
• The default is to publish, which prevents unnecessary secrecy and helps rebuild trust.
• Requiring all members to agree before keeping anything secret adds a strong, non‑partisan check.
• A special advisor gives expert, independent guidance on privacy and harm, reducing the risk of wrongful disclosures.
• A 25‑year release rule ensures history is not locked away forever and supports future research.

Opponents' View#

• The unanimity rule may be too strict; one member could block confidentiality and force releases that harm reputations or privacy.
• Barring civil lawsuits over released facts could leave people without a remedy if they are harmed by publication.
• Overriding other access and confidentiality laws may set a risky precedent and weaken protections meant to apply in sensitive cases.
• The process could become politicized, given the committee’s makeup and the charged history of the 1995 referendum.
• Administrative work and legal vetting may cost money and time, with unclear timelines if the committee needs extensions.