Reform leader Preston Manning must be smiling this summer as he takes some well-publicized French language training in Quebec.
The rules of the so-called “national unity” debate are beginning to shift in his favor and he surely can take some of the credit. Western Canadian sensibilities may for the first time be setting the agenda for national unity planning.
Although the other political players would deny it, Manning and his tough-love prescription for Quebec are already casting a long shadow.
Consider some recent developments.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
In Ottawa, the federal government has started to toughen its stance in dealings with Quebec’s sovereignist government. It is insisting Ottawa have a say in formulating the next independence referendum question and help set the rules on what would be a binding victory margin.
Intergovernmental affairs minister StŽphane Dion last week wrote Quebec premier Lucien Bouchard to insist that an independent Quebec should not assume it would be able to retain all the territory the province of Quebec now holds.
Separatist leaders have been aggressively denouncing the “partitionist” movement of federalists who insist they would carve territory out of Quebec to stay with Canada.
Dion said, in effect, that he disagrees with the partition of his country, Canada. But if it can be carved up, then so can Quebec. Predictably, Dion was denounced by Quebec leaders as “anti-democratic” for his comments, labelled the “partitionist general-in-chief.”
Manning, who has campaigned for a stronger federalist response, could only applaud the suddenly-visible Liberal backbone. Meanwhile, provincial premiers outside Quebec have decided to meet this autumn to discuss strategies for a new national-unity initiative.
At the core of the provincial talk is an assumption, supported by the suddenly unity-conscious big business lobby, that all provinces are equal but different.
The solution to federal-provincial tensions, they say, is a large-scale decentralization of responsibility from Ottawa to all provincial capitals.
English-speaking premiers have discovered they can piggyback a ride to greater power and glory on the national unity ticket. Once again, Manning can only applaud. No special status for Quebec and a weakening of the federal government have been his issues for years.
A few months ago during the federal election campaign, Manning was denounced by other party leaders for his sometimes over-the-top assertions that Quebec and Quebeckers have set the unity agenda for too long, that other Canadians want a say, that appeasement of Quebec separatists is not the way to go.
Prime minister Jean ChrŽtien, New Democratic Party leader Alexa McDonough and Conservative leader Jean Charest insisted Manning was dangerous, outside the Canadian political mainstream, an anti-French bigot.
Now the ground is shifting.
The Calgary-based politician may not be getting any credit for it but his tactical proposals appear to be gaining ground. Call it influence without recognition.
