Supreme Court decision helpful

Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada brought some badly needed common sense to the national unity debate.

In a landmark decision, the court ruled that Canada has an obligation to negotiate in good faith if a clear majority of Quebecers vote in favor of a clearly worded statement of secession.

Although some separatists tried to portray that as a victory for the separatist forces, the truth was far different.

The negotiations would be a political process, said the court, and nothing about their outcome would be preordained by law – not even whether Quebec does in fact separate:

Read Also

Producers face the reality of shifting grain price expectations

Significant price shifts have occurred in various grains as compared to what was expected at the beginning of the calendar year. Crop insurance prices can be used as a base for the changes.

“No negotiations could be effective if their ultimate outcome, secession, is cast as an absolute legal entitlement based on an obligation to give effect to that act of secession in the Constitution. Such a foregone conclusion would actually undermine the obligation to negotiate and render it hollow.”

Elsewhere in the lengthy ruling, the court declares emphatically: “There would be no conclusions predetermined by law on any issue.”

The implications of this should be made clear to any Quebecer who might be tempted to vote for “negotiations” about Quebec independence.

In any such negotiations, Quebec would have no guarantee that the outcome would not include any or all of:

Loss of the northern half of the province to either Canada or a new independent First Nations state.
Ontario annexation of English-speaking areas on the east bank of the Ottawa River.
Demilitarization of Quebec under a strategic Canada-U.S. military umbrella, with a ban on any other nations establishing military bases or forces in the area.
Application of the high supply-management tariffs against Quebec dairy and poultry products.

The list could go on at great length. If even a few such unpleasant outcomes emerge from the negotiations, it would not be surprising if many pro-separatist Quebecers changed their views.

But maintenance of national unity also requires pointing out the positive aspects of Confederation.

In tracing the evolution of Confederation, the Supreme Court noted the positive goals expressed by George-Etienne Cartier:

“In our own federation, we will have Catholics and Protestants, English, French, Irish and Scots and everyone, through his efforts and successes, will add to the prosperity and glory of the new confederation. We are of different races, not so that we can wage war on one another, but in order to work together for our well-being.”