The Quebec referendum of Oct. 30, 1995, was a very close call for Canada, with political ramifications that resonate to this day.
The federal government joining the legal challenge to Quebec鈥檚 Bill 99, which affirms a 50 per cent-plus-one vote enough to declare independence, is the latest echo.
The referendum 18 years ago was a one-point game, with the no side prevailing by 50.58 to 49.42 per cent. Had only 31,000 votes gone the other way, we might have lost our country. Jacques Parizeau had made it very clear that in the event of no negotiations for a partnership with Canada, he would unilaterally declare Quebec鈥檚 independence.
As a result, the Chr茅tien government referred the whole secession question to the Supreme Court, which in 1998 ruled that there must be a clear majority to a clear question, in which case the federal government would be obliged to negotiate the breakup of the country.
Bill 99 was Quebec鈥檚 response in 2000 to the Clarity Act, which implemented the Supreme Court judgment. English-rights activist Keith Henderson then filed a legal challenge, which has been in limbo for 13 years. But the challenge will finally be heard in Quebec Superior Court, and the news that the federal government joined the case two weeks ago has set off a firestorm.
Quebec Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Alexandre Cloutier said that is a 鈥渄irect鈥� and 鈥渄evious鈥� attack on Quebecers鈥� right to determine their future. Predictably, all parties in the National Assembly approved a motion supporting Bill 99, although the Liberals noted that Jean Charest had warned, back in the day, it would be susceptible to a constitutional challenge that could weaken Quebec.
In the midst of all this noise, Denis Lebel, minister of intergovernmental affairs and Stephen Harper鈥檚 Quebec lieutenant, was asked whether he thought 50 per cent plus one was enough. He tried to avoid the question in one interview, but finally replied: 鈥淲e鈥檝e always said we鈥檇 leave that to Quebecers, but, yes, it is for me.鈥�
The words were scarcely out of his mouth before the 91原创 Press filed this lead: 鈥淎 split has emerged in the Conservative government over a fundamental principle: the rules governing the potential breakup of Canada.鈥�
Harper had a different interpretation in question period the next day.
鈥淭he fact of the matter is we believe, on this side, that debates on the process for dividing the country are best left to the courts,鈥� he said. 鈥淓verybody on this side, including the minister of intergovernmental affairs, is an unconditional supporter of the unity of this country. I believe that Quebecers, as much as anyone else, do not want another referendum. They do not want to be arguing about this. They want to be taking this country, united together, forward into the future.鈥�
The New Democrats were delighted by Lebel鈥檚 quotes. Their position, since the Sherbrooke Declaration of 2005, has been clearly in favour of 50 per cent plus one being enough. Tom Mulcair added a nuance last winter when he added that the NDP would make sure the question was a clear one. But from the time of the 1980 referendum, there has been consensus among all parties in Quebec on two points. First, the question would be written by the National Assembly. Second, 50 per cent plus one would be enough.
The Supreme Court ruling and the Clarity Act changed that, which is what brought on Bill 99 in the first place.
Both the 1980 referendum on sovereignty association and the 1995 referendum on an economic partnership with Canada were ambiguous questions. A clear question, as the Liberals reminded the Parti Qu茅b茅cois in the legislature last week, would be along the lines of next September鈥檚 Scottish referendum: 鈥淪hould Scotland be an independent country?鈥�
Absent a PQ majority in the next election, there will be no referendum in the foreseeable future. And no election before next spring, either. Pauline Marois ruled that last weekend.
After using the proposed Charter of Quebec values as a wedge issue with rural voters, the PQ was still four points behind the Liberals, 38-34, in a CROP poll last week.
There鈥檚 no majority, and no referendum, in numbers like that.
听
L. Ian MacDonald is editor of Policy magazine.
