opinion
The debate over Quebec separation has taken some strange twists, but none stranger than the sight last week of Lucien Bouchard accusing Jean ChrŽtien of lacking faith in Canada.
Prime minister ChrŽtien had fallen into the trap by telling Quebecers that Canada would be destroyed if Quebec obtained its independence. ChrŽtien even suggested there might not be anyone to negotiate with Quebec – “Who has a mandate to speak for the so-called rest of Canada?”
It was an interesting point, but it gave Bouchard an opportunity to unleash his rhetoric about what a great nation “English Canada” is – “they too have built between themselves deep links of solidarity, great emotion and the country they share they feel in their hearts.”
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
In a remark that might leave many Western Canadians either laughing or grumbling, Bouchard also asserted that one unifying characteristic of this English-speaking nation is loyalty to the central government in Ottawa.
Those who remember how the National Energy Policy robbed billions of dollars from the West, or those who are currently fighting repressive gun-control legislation, might be forgiven for quibbling with that interpretation.
Indeed, it could be closer to the truth to say that most regions of Canada have often felt a kinship and political alliance in their objections to Ottawa’s use of centralized power.
The ChrŽtien-Bouchard exchange, however, opens up some interesting questions. What is it that we do like about Canada? What are the shared values and traditions that make Canada different from other countries? Could loyalty to “Canada,” by whatever definition, survive the loss of Quebec? The rest of us may have to face those questions if Quebec votes for separation.
Some might argue that Canada without Quebec would have a healthier balance of power between the east, west and centre. Regional frustrations might ease with increased power.
Others could equally well point to strong economic and cultural reasons for the three regions to go separate ways. The West, for example, could carve out a strong economic future as a Pacific Rim nation.
Regardless of what happens in the long run, however, the prime minister is largely right in his assessment of what would happen in the short term if Quebec separates – “Canada” as we know it would be destroyed, and there is no guarantee that allegiance to a new concept of Canada would emerge.
The possibility of Quebec separation should not be taken lightly. Canadians are fortunate enough to live in one of the best countries in the world, and we should make whatever contribution we can to preserve it – from sea to sea.
