E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

Canadian lawmakers vote “bombshell’ Quebec motion
So long, Canada, nice knowing you.
OTTAWA - Canada’s House of Commons is expected to pass Monday a motion recognizing the country’s independence-minded Quebec province as a “nation” within the nation, a move critics brand a “bombshell” step that could splinter the country.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, after a surprise announcement last week, presented the motion asking that lawmakers “recognize that Quebecers constitute a nation within a united Canada.”

The move was seen both as a symbolic benchmark and a political ploy by the conservative government, but branded by newspapers as a ”political bombshell” that could encourage Quebec’s separatist movement. It is the first time a prime minister has recognized the concept of “nation” for the province, even if only as a symbolic gesture, said Antonia Maioni, who heads Canadian studies at Quebec’s McGill University.
As Orrin Judd likes to say, any people that think of themselves as a nation are one. If the Quebecers want to be a nation, perhaps the rest of Canada should wave goodbye and focus on the Anglophone nation that's left.
For McGill political science professor Eric Belanger, Harper’s move is a “battle of symbols” with an ultimate political aim. “What matters is getting back the support of Quebec voters,” he said, adding that Harper’s Conservative Party-led government must make inroads in Quebec’s electorate if it wants to win in the next parliamentary elections widely expected in 2007.

Harper’s popularity in the mainly French-speaking province has dipped dramatically lately due to his opposition to the Kyoto Protocol to fight global warming and a foreign policy deemed too friendly to the United States.

But Michael Ignatieff, a prominent member of the opposition Liberals, also jumped on the issue of a resolution for Quebec, earning the ire of some his own party members. The issue has split Liberals, who are to vote in the coming week on a new leader, with Ignatieff one of the leading candidates for the post, which could put him in a position to challenge Harper for the prime minister’s post next year. But some of Ignatieff’s rivals are accusing him of opening a ”constitutional Pandora’s Box” over Quebec’s status.

In a move meant to embarrass the country’s federalists, the separatist Bloc Quebecois were about to present their own motion on Quebec’s “nation” status that did not mention Canada, before Harper pulled the rug from under them with his proposal which mentions Quebec as belonging to a “united Canada.”

Although they objected to that phrase, the Bloc on Friday announced they would support Harper’s motion. “Our motion will be defeated. But what is important is that the Quebec be recognized as a nation,” said Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe on explaining his about-face.

The prime minister’s motion is expected to sail through the Chamber of Deputies since all political parties have expressed their support.

“We are delighted that this week Canada will become the first country to officially recognize the Quebec nation,” Duceppe said, adding that the acknowledgment would become yet”another weapon” in the regional group’s arsenal aiming for Quebec’s independence. Quebecers will eventually decide their own fate, not Ottawa, he added.

Quebec separatists, now in opposition in the province, have promised to hold another referendum if they return to power in the next provincial election, expected in 2007.

On his part, Harper on Friday tried to reassure English-speaking Canadians who accuse him of putting the country’s unity at risk that his motion is neither a constitutional amendment nor bill of law, but merely a statement of recognition and a gesture of reconciliation.

Recognizing that the concept of Quebec as a nation was difficult for many Canadians to swallow, Harper suggested a sociological definition for the term “nation”: a people sharing the same language, history and culture. Canadians often forget that French-speakers founded their country, he said.
No they didn't: French and English speakers together did so. See the Dominion Act of 1867.

Posted by: Steve White 2006-11-27
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=173220