If Albertans decide to hold a referendum on separation, Quebeckers might reconsider their aversion to another sovereignty vote of their own, writes Konrad Yakabuski.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press
Quebeckers have generally followed the rise of Alberta’s separatist movement with a sense of bewilderment. Having spent their whole lives debating the existential questions of national identity and belonging, including through two draining and divisive referendums, they understand that one does not break up a country on a whim.
Hold a vote on whether to remain in Canada because a pipeline didn’t get built? Because a former federal government championed environmental policies – supported by every opposition party but one – that appeared antithetical to Alberta’s economic interests?
It is hard to think of a precedent in the annals of secession movements in which similar grievances have served as grounds for dismantling either a unitary or federal state.
If the legal basis for the separation of any province remains a matter of debate under Canadian and international law, secessionist movements in Europe and Quebec have historically been rooted in the concept of nationhood, as defined by a shared culture, identity and language that are distinct from those of a majority of a country’s population.
Alberta’s separatists do not fit this mould.
Still, since Quebeckers strongly believe that any decision about their province’s future within Canada is theirs – and only theirs – to make, they are not about to get in the way of Alberta’s referendum. The real question is whether that vote will give Quebeckers an appetite for another one of their own.
In the past year, polls have been unambiguous in showing that most Quebeckers do not want another plebiscite on sovereignty, which the Parti Québécois promises to hold if it wins the Oct. 5 provincial election. But as Alberta enters an emotionally charged, and highly unpredictable, referendum campaign, public opinion in Quebec could shift rapidly.
We know that fear of missing out, or FOMO as the phenomenon is commonly known, can influence voting behaviour, especially as more people engage in political debate on social media. If it starts to look like more Albertans might vote in favour of holding a referendum on separation, Quebeckers might reconsider their aversion to another sovereignty vote in their province.
Indeed, Alberta’s referendum campaign is already having an impact on Quebec politics.
Quebec politicians condemn Carney’s comments on conditions for referendum victory
Quebec’s political class was unanimous this week in denouncing Prime Minister Mark Carney’s insistence that the threshold required by the federal government to recognize the result of a future provincial referendum on sovereignty “is not 50 per cent plus one” in favour of separation. Even the federalist Quebec Liberal Party took issue with that.
Mr. Carney based his comments on the federal Clarity Act, which was passed in 2000 by then-prime minister Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government and based on a Supreme Court reference case on the potential secession of Quebec.
The Court determined that only “a clear majority on a clear question” would require Ottawa to negotiate Quebec’s separation, but it did not define either term. Under the Clarity Act, it is up to the House of Commons to do so, considering not just the size of the majority but “the percentage of eligible voters in the referendum.”
The Clarity Act was widely seen as Mr. Chrétien’s Plan B to prevent Quebec separation after his Plan A of trying to persuade Quebeckers of the merits of federalism resulted in near-death experience of the 1995 referendum, in which 49.4 per cent of Quebeckers voted “yes” to sovereignty. Ottawa feared the PQ would seek another vote quickly.
Quebec responded to the Clarity Act with a law of its own, setting the threshold for the “winning option” in a future sovereignty referendum at 50 per cent plus one of only votes cast. The law, known as Bill 99, was upheld by the Quebec Court of Appeal in 2021.
Quebec politicians of all stripes stand by the law, noting that the 50-per-cent-plus-one threshold is the norm almost everywhere, at least among democratic countries, where separatist movements have emerged.
Mr. Carney’s decision to bring up the Clarity Act now is what’s called an unforced political error. It was an unnecessary intervention, considering he had already confirmed that the law would not apply to the Alberta referendum, since Albertans will not be voting directly on separation.
For all its supporters in the rest of Canada, the Clarity Act, the brainchild of former intergovernmental affairs minister Stéphane Dion, is overwhelmingly seen in Quebec as a legal straitjacket conjured up in Ottawa to deny Quebeckers their right to self-determination. It sets out conditions for secession that are effectively impossible to satisfy, not least of which is a Constitutional amendment that would likely require unanimity among all provinces and Ottawa.
Just by mentioning the Clarity Act, Mr. Carney has already done the PQ a huge favour. Should he keep it up, he may just deliver a PQ majority in October.