Parti Quebecois seeking Canadian `sovereignty without consequences'

`They want a sovereignty without consequences". So says Benoit Pelletier, the Quebec Liberal Party's spokesperson for intergovernmental affairs of his political opponents, the Parti Quebecois. He believes they are a separatist party, a label they reject in favour of their demand for "sovereignty-partnership" or "sovereignty-association" with Canada.

If he is right in his prediction that another referendum will be called on these questions next year we will hear a lot more about them.

A Yes vote would have major consequences for the future of Quebec, Canada and North America, hinging on the issues of secession, federalism and the very survival of Canada as a political entity on that continent.

Before he was elected to the Quebec National Assembly last year, Mr Pelletier was a professor of constitutional law. This puts him in a good position to fulfil the mandate he has been given by his party to chair their committee on Quebecfederal relations, whose report is eagerly awaited.

He hopes it can contribute much-needed clarity to the debate. It is a complex matter, reflecting the reality of Canada's experience with multiculturalism, poly-ethnicity and multi-nationalism, which has brought British, French, immigrant and aboriginal affairs together historically and culturally.

Canada is quite distinct from the United States in the ways it has handled these affairs, a fact that determines its several political identities. It has been arguably the most constitutionally innovative country in addressing them, both practically and theoretically.

On a recent visit with a group of European journalists from such constitutionally complex states as Belgium, Switzerland, Austria, the United Kingdom and Germany this became clear in a detailed set of briefings.

And yet the central question of Quebec's status within the Canadian federation remains unresolved. In the overwhelmingly anglophone so-called Rest of Canada, Quebec's quest for recognition as a distinct society based on its francophone culture and way of life has been rebuffed on successive occasions, increasingly in the name of the need to preserve the equal treatment of its provinces entrenched in the constitution repatriated from the UK by Pierre Trudeau in 1982.

The common anglophone assumption is that Canada is a one-nation state requiring legal uniformity in its federal system.

There is also a great weariness, a constitutional fatigue, with the seemingly endless political discussion of the matter; so much so that the federal minister responsible for intergovernmental affairs, Mr Stephane Dion, acknowledges that politicians in the capital, Ottawa, are unwilling to risk unpopularity by raising it again.

He denies it is dormant, however, and has been active in arguing the case against secession and separatism. He welcomed the supreme court's judgment on secession last August. It argued, with masterful balance, that while this was a legitimate aspiration it would have to be clearly put and decided upon and then negotiated in accordance with established principles of democracy, federalism, minority rights, agreed frontiers and international recognition.

The Parti Quebecois welcomed the stress on negotiation, while Mr Dion's federal Liberal Party has emphasised the very difficult hurdles to be overcome; clearly in his eyes this is decidedly a sovereignty with such overwhelming consequences as to dissuade many Quebec voters from opting for it.

IN an interview before his visit here, starting in Northern Ireland this weekend, the Canadian Prime Minister, Mr Jean Chretien, leader of the Liberal Party and a francophone Quebecois himself - one of many such people holding high office in the federal system - described how his Parti Quebecois opponents hate to be labelled separatists, given that most Quebecois don't want to separate from Canada. He also welcomed the supreme court judgment, saying the problem is to define precisely what is meant by the demand for sovereignty-partnership and still have a functioning Canada left.

"It is so confusing. The last time [in 1995] I could have voted Yes myself". He is optimistic that the issue can be resolved, but acutely aware of how close the last vote was. On a 95 per cent turnout, 49.4 per cent voted No, 50.6 per cent Yes.

Asked to define Quebec distinctiveness, Ms Louise Beaudoin, minister for international affairs in the provincial government of Quebec ebecois declared simply: "La langue. Quebec is a nation, a people with our own interests related to our identity".

She points out that 80 per cent of Quebec is francophone, 50 per cent of whom are bilingual; but this represents a mere 2 per cent of the overwhelmingly anglophone North American population; in Canada francophones number only 4 per cent of the Canadian population and are subject to more and more linguistic assimilation. She is convinced a sovereign Quebec could survive economically in a more globalised world.

Hence the demand for recognition of Quebec as a distinct society, free to represent itself internationally. According to Mr Jean-Pierre Charbonneau, speaker of the Quebec National Assembly, either a sovereignty-partnership agreement with Canada, amounting to a confederation, or a renewed federalism in which Quebec enjoys special status would be two huge steps forward.

The mayor of Quebec City, Mr Jean-Paul L'Allier, agrees, saying Canada had historically been a loose, non-centralised federalism until the Trudeau period.

Prof Guy Laforest of Laval University says there is an imperial aspect to Canadian federalism, giving too much power to politicians in Ottawa, exemplified by the appointed, non-territorial senate and judiciary.

He agrees that most Quebecois do not want separation and most would agree with the slogan, "A strong Quebec in a united Canada".

Polls show a maximum 30 per cent of outright separatists, with a crucial floating vote of 30-50 per cent in favour of a renegotiated deal with Canada, varying according to perceptions of rejection, contempt or humiliation by the Rest of Canada and how their incomes would be affected.

Mr Pelletier accepts that Quebec is a nation, but distinguishes nationalism sharply from separatism. It is possible to accommodate Quebec within a Canada conceived as a multinational federation in which it would have asymmetric powers compared to the other provinces, in recognition of its linguistic and cultural distinctiveness.

He says a confederation represents a treaty-based agreement between sovereign states, which is not appropriate for Canada and the creation of which would be tantamount to separation.

Others concur that this makes political sense.

Canada could, indeed, blaze a trail with considerable relevance elsewhere, especially in Europe, were it to create such a compromise. But elsewhere in Canada there is little patience for recognising Quebec nationality.

It promises to be a messy and lengthy political process with an uncertain outcome in what is normally perceived to be one of the most placid political cultures in the developed world.

An interview with the Canadian Prime Minister, Mr Jean Chretien will be published on Monday