Financial Post
for September 4, 1998

The Bloc/Parti Quebecois have done a brilliant job with the recent Supreme Court of Canada reference which held that Quebec can't secede unilaterally. Their job has been made much easier by two factors - the court's babbling on in obiter dicta about what a majority is and the obligation of Canada to negotiate if there is a "yes" vote - and the indecent haste with which Jean Chretien and Stephane Dion rose to the bait.

There was a time, long ago, when courts economized on words while still giving complete judgments. If you're interested in judicial wisdom accompanied by brevity, pop down to your nearest law library and read, at random the decisions rendered in pre Victorian times, in the English Reports or Cox's Criminal cases. Now there's evidently a self imposed obligation by the Supreme Court of Canada, that most political of courts, to ramble on and on ensuring not certainty but more litigation.

More on the Chretien/Dion reaction in a moment.

It's bewildering that so many in or commenting on politics assume that astute politicians don't anticipate events. The BQ/PQ spent a year thinking about how to respond to this case and it showed.

They knew that no Supreme Court of any country was going to preside at its dismemberment. That wasn't an option.

The question then became, with what excess verbiage would the court surround what in essence was "no"? That wasn't too tough to figure out either because - dare I repeat myself - this is a highly political court which feels compelled to talk a lot. The separatists concluded that the court would delve into the question of what if there was a "yes" vote, while musing about what really constitutes a "yes" vote - without giving any intelligible answers. That sort of political prognosticating is child's play to good politicians which Mr Bouchard and Mr Duceppe clearly are.

One option would be to condemn the decision outright as the irrelevant opinion of a court appointed by the federal government for the purpose of upholding the Ottawa view of things. They could have simply given a Gallic shrug and said what else would you have expected?

That would never do because to achieve separation it's necessary to appear to Quebeckers that you're playing by the rules.

Thus option 2. Love the decision to death. Declare victory. Agree with the court, albeit selectively.

For this to work it was necessary to provoke the Prime Minister and his eminently provokable Intergovernmental Affairs minister into throwing the size of the needed majority into the debate, front and center. Never mind that the court said we can't just quit, let's concentrate on the entrails not the chicken itself. Get Ottawa all het up on the size of the majority and the wording of referendum questions - that's the strategy.

For it was crucial that it not only look legal but that a debate be provoked with the Liberal Government wherein the latter would demand thresholds of voter support for separation which to many Quebeckers wouuld seem unreasonable. Messrs Chretien and Dion cooperated quickly and decisively as if puppets dancing to separatist controlled strings.

Last Monday I spoke with Pierre Brien, the BQ's Intergovernmental Affairs critic, who while dodging my questions, confirmed the game plan. It's a three stage rocket. First a simple referendum question which goes something like this - do you favour, after suitable negotiations with Ottawa, an independent Quebec? Second, an apparently conscientious but transparently fraudulent pursuit of negotiations knowing full well that Ottawa has no authority to negotiate. Lastly, return to the people, eyebrows raised in mock sincerity, claiming that in light of Ottawa's intransigence, there must now be a referendum on separation for real. And it's all nice and legal like. Even if the yes vote is a bare majority it won't matter because by that time, there'll be little stomach for a fight left on the federalist side.

What should the Prime Minister say?

Simple. We accept that 50%+1 is the standard. Hold your referendum, the sooner the better. If you don't hold one, we will. We must stop constitutional wrangling fraught with traditional weasel words and hold the mother of all referenda.

And we, the federalists, will win that vote because the people of Quebec facing, for the first time, a fair question will opt for Canada.

That is the courageous way - and it happens to be the only sensible way.