The Clarity Bill and the Quebec Secession Reference: Shooting Down the Lodestar of Canadian Federalism

• Author: Daniel Turp
• Profession: Faculté de droit, Université de Montreal
• Pages: 267-273

Quebec Secession Reference:

Let

me

first

tell

you how

pleased

I am to be in

Osgoode Hall

and to

attend these Special Lectures

2000

of the Law

Society

of

Upper Canada.

I

would like

to

thank Professor Monahan

for his

invitation

to

speak

again this year

on the

Quebec

Secession

Reference1

and to

share

my

vi

ews

with

you on its

continuing legal

and

political impact

in

Canada

and

Quebec,

and

particularly

on the way in

which

the

government

of

Canada

is

attempting

to

give

effect

to the

advisory opinion

of the

Supreme Court

through the provisions of Bill C-20, the so-called Clarity Bill.2

I can

comment

on the

debates that were held

in the

House

of

Commons

on the

Clarity

Bill

and

that

led to its

passage

by the

Lower

House

on

March

15,2000.1

can

also bring

you up to

date

on the

debates

currently

being held

in the

Senate,

which have been given

a

much more

legal perspective than those held

in the

House

of

Commons,

as

Professor

Monahan will certainly have noticed when

he

testified

before

MP

for

Beauharnois-Salaberry,

Bloc

Quebecois

Critic

for

Intergovernmental

Affairs.

Professor,

Faculte

de

droit,

Universite

de

Montreal,

(on

leave

at the

time

this lecture

was

presented).

1

Reference

Re

Secession

of

Quebec,

[1998]

2

S.C.R.

217

[hereinafter

the

Secession

Reference].

2

Bill

C-20,

An Act to

give

effect

to the

requirement

for

clarity

as set out in the

opinion

of

the

Supreme Court

of

Canada

in the

Quebec Secession

Reference,

2d

Sess., 36th

Parl.,

2000

[hereinafter

Clarity

Bill].

267

Shooting Down

the

Lodestar

of

Canadian Federalism

Daniel

Turp*

The

Clarity

Bill

and the

*