Gimbol's diatribe and screed

Repeating Mulroney's mistake

Our hero Proffessor Icky wants to return to Meech Lake.

Maybe he should think twice about what happens when you decide to give one province more protection than the others.

I'm sure Icky see's no correlation between these two guys.

Perhaps though if as leader of the oppostion before he criticises the current PM for his "status quo" he might want to read up on where exactly Stephen Harper stands on the subject.

excerpt:

But the Clarity Act, which sets out a clear legal mechanism for the secession of a province, was really the brainchild of the old Reform party. Following the October 1995 Quebec referendum, almost won by the sovereignists, Reform released Twenty Realities of Secession, a working document which laid down terms for bargaining with Quebec in the event of that province's departure. It was written by Stephen Harper, today the leader of the Conservative Party, and then a Reform MP. It was published, along with 20 Proposals for a New Confederation, in January 1996, in a pamphlet entitled 20/20: A Vision for the Future of Canada.
The Liberals throughout the referendum campaign had attacked Reform, accusing the party of obstructionism and, by breaking solidarity within the federalist camp, of undermining the campaign against Quebec separatism.
But unlike the Liberals, who had refused to discuss such issues, Reform faced the tough questions head on. Harper pressed the government for its response to Reform's Twenty Realities, but, he complained, received no satisfactory answers.
Yet most of what appeared in Twenty Realities was later incorporated into the Liberal party's own Clarity Act. It was political scientist Stephane Dion, who in January 1996 had become the federal minister of intergovernmental affairs, who picked up the Reform ball and ran with it.

And to be more precise, Mikey can just read up on the Hansard from Oct of 96 to see what Mr Harper thought about how PM Chretien was handling the Quebec file.

Mr. Stephen Harper (Calgary West, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, one year ago we came within a whisker of a yes vote in the Quebec referendum. Mr. Parizeau was ready with his plans but the federal government had no plan for a yes vote and, for that matter, no plan for a no vote. What has happened since? Canadians overwhelmingly want to preserve this as a country of equals in a federal system. Yet the government persists in its concept of distinct society, appealing to the same kind of special status sentiment as Quebec separatists do. Little if any progress has been made on the reform of federal institutions or decentralization to the provinces or respect for their jurisdictions.
The federal government's plan B is also more words than action. It has referred the question of unilateral independence to the Supreme Court but has not developed plans of its own for the next referendum. It still has no contingency legislation to avoid the mistakes and ambiguities of the past.
We must all stand on guard and that must mean more than just standing
still.

Oh and the part about bill C-341?

QUEBEC CONTINGENCY ACT (REFERENDUM CONDITIONS)
Mr. Stephen Harper (Calgary West, Ref.) moved for leave to introduce Bill C-341, an act to establish the terms and conditions that must apply to a referendum relating to the separation of Quebec from Canada before it may be recognized as a proper expression of the will of the people of Quebec.

He said: Mr. Speaker, this bill outlines a process for dealing with any future referendum on the issue of Quebec sovereignty. There are three main features of this bill. First, it allows the Government of Canada to determine whether a referendum question in Quebec is clear and unambiguous. If it is not, the Government of Canada is required to undertake a number of actions, including the holding of a parallel referendum in Quebec which asks a clear question on separation from Canada.

Second, in the event of a yes vote, the bill authorizes the negotiation of separation subject to consultation with the provinces. Any final settlement would be subject to approval in a national referendum.

Finally, the bill affirms that a unilateral declaration of independence is ineffective with respect to Canadian law and does not affect the functioning of the Canadian Parliament, government or courts with respect to Quebec.

These proposals avoid the mistakes of the past, ensure a respect for our legal order and ensure that all Canadians, including Quebecers, have a role in shaping their future.

posted by gimbol @ 3:21 AM