Have our leaders learned nothing? On Oct. 30, 1995, Quebeckers voted 49.4 per cent for secession. Had the vote tipped 50 per cent, Jacques Parizeau was set to declare Quebec’s independence.
Prime minister Jean Chrétien failed to challenge the myth that Quebec could secede unilaterally after a majority vote for sovereignty. No major federalist defended the constitutional order despite the legal opinion of five eminent international law experts that “the Quebec people effectively exercises its right to self-determination within the framework of the Canadian whole and is not legally entitled to invoke it to justify a future accession to independence.”
A scorched Mr. Chrétien sent a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada. The court replied that secession was a legitimate aspiration but only if enacted according to the Constitution.
Mr. Chrétien and Stéphane Dion then passed the Clarity Act. But, both before and after the reference, Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Dion declared that Quebeckers would be allowed to secede if they clearly wanted to. This undermined the court and reduced the Clarity Act to a paper tiger.
Fifteen years later, Quebec’s political class still maintains that any majority in a consultative referendum guarantees the unconditional right to secede. Premier Jean Charest defends in court Lucien Bouchard’s Bill 99 asserting Quebec’s unfettered right to secede.
Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe leaves no doubt in a just-published book, Gilles Duceppe: Entretiens [Interviews] avec Gilles Toupin: “We have the democratic power to change things. We can, overnight, govern ourselves. All that’s needed is to say ‘yes.’ ”
The Clarity Act? Not to worry. It’s just a bluff. “The fact is that the Clarity Act was intended, at the time, to reassure the Canadians. Chrétien wanted to show that he was doing something.”
The Supreme Court’s insistence that Quebec must obtain the consent of the rest of Canada to secede, otherwise it’s revolution? Mr. Duceppe insists Quebec is bound neither by the court nor the Clarity Act.
“I tell my people not to get all worked up over the Court’s opinion or over the Clarity Act. We will carry out our business in accordance with the National Assembly, and they will decide how they intend to negotiate.” So Quebec alone will decide.
Mr. Duceppe recognizes only half of the four conditions set by the court: that the question be clear and the answer clear. He argues that the arcane questions in the 1980 and 1995 referendums were clear. A clear question is whatever the National Assembly decides.
The answer will also be clear: “The acceptable percentage is 50 per cent plus one.” Why? “In Quebec, the Liberal Party, the PQ, the ADQ and Québec Solidaire all agree. It’s 50 per cent plus one.” Quebec has the last word, not the court.
While Quebec is not bound by the court’s decision, other Canadians are. “They will have to take into account the advice of the Supreme Court, which says that they are obliged to negotiate in good faith on condition that we have offered a clear question in the next referendum. And our question will be clear, of that I have no doubt.”
Mr. Duceppe, Pauline Marois and Mr. Parizeau spin a fairy-tale secession. They build castles on the St. Lawrence. Their magic thinking, never refuted convincingly, is generally accepted by Quebeckers. It will be too late, in the next referendum campaign, to challenge their revolutionary screed.
Wake up and smell the danger. Otherwise, silence will be mistaken for consent.
