John Ivison: The awakened separatist dragon will not easily go back to sleep

On Saturday night, Mark Carney delivered the most consummately Canadian boast since Joe Clark declared “I’m not the greatest. I’m the best available.”

“Canada isn’t perfect. But we are the best,” the prime minister said at the Forever Canadian rally in Edmonton.

It was a surefooted performance that may have moved a few disgruntled federalists back into the “remain” column.

But he was premature in the extreme when he said a decisive referendum result will “settle this question.”

The experience of long-dormant separatist movements that have been awoken like Tolkien’s dragon is that they do not go back to sleep once they have sniffed the prospect of political power.

It’s true the polling suggests a variety of reasons for voting to leave Canada: A recent Abacus Data poll found only a quarter of those voting to pursue a separation referendum said they wanted to set up an independent country.

Albertans have long had a sense of distinct identity and the independence campaign has given it political expression.

Western separatist parties have risen before. Gordon Kesler was elected as a member of Alberta’s legislative assembly in a byelection in 1982 and lost his seat in the subsequent general election, where his Western Canada Concept party won 11.8 per cent of the vote. Today the separatists have the backing of one in four of the province’s voters.

In other jurisdictions, that level of support has provided the base for viable, long-term political movements.

René Lévesque founded the Parti Québécois in 1968 and two years later won seven seats in the provincial legislature with 23 per cent of the vote.

In Scotland, long-simmering nationalist sentiment took on a political aspect in the first 1974 general election, with the Scottish National Party winning seven seats with 22 per cent of the vote.

Both the PQ and the SNP are currently governing their respective jurisdictions.

But if the bad news is that separatism is a slow-burning fire that is hard to extinguish, the good news is that voters everywhere are in no hurry to break up successful countries.

While they tub-thump for their distinct identity, they are not necessarily convinced political autonomy is necessary to achieve their full potential.

Quebec sovereigntists have already lost two referendums; Scottish separatists were defeated in one.

So, what happens next? Carney told reporters on Tuesday morning that “it’s a great day for Canada” and that he was “thrilled” by a result that showed three in four Alberta voters want to remain in Canada.

But there was no triumphalism and he was cautious when asked about the immigration issue, which will surely become the next focus for the separatists.

A majority of Albertans voted that the province should have increased control over immigration (a foregone conclusion given the wording of the question that all but asked whether foreigners should be allowed in to steal all the jobs and women).

Carney told the New York Times recently that the question is: when does Canada resume “controlled increase” of the population?

On Tuesday, he was much more focused on the cuts his government has made to admissions for asylum seekers, foreign workers and students. “Where we go from here needs to be established in co-operation with the provinces,” he said.

It was an issue on which Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre was quick to pounce, since it is one of the few where his position — that immigration is out of control and numbers should be cut — is more aligned with voters than the government is.

Poilievre has been criticized even by Conservatives over his movement being “too nice and too close” to the separatists and President Donald Trump. The Conservative leader did little to assuage those concerns when he promised a “Canada First” immigration policy and support for those who have “lost hope in Canada” after 11 years of Liberal rule.

But if Poilievre’s position is out of step with many voters, it is less precarious than that of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.

She is considered a separatist sympathizer by federalists for enabling the vote in the first place, and to hard-core separatists she’s a federalist turncoat for endorsing the stay vote.

“We have already won the first series of battles in the war for Alberta independence,” said leading separatist spokesperson Jeffrey Rath, who probably did more to turn people from his cause than anyone else. He said the next phase of the campaign is to replace Smith as leader of the United Conservative Party at an annual general meeting next month and turn it into a pro-independence party.

Since a majority of UCP supporters indicated they planned to vote to pursue separation, it is not far-fetched to think the party will become the vehicle for sovereigntist ambitions.

That should not be grounds for panic. Just two provincial ridings recorded a separatist majority in Monday’s referendum vote: Central Peace–Notley and Rimbey–Rocky Mountain House–Sundre.

But the tapeworm of separatism has entered Alberta’s body politic, and it will not pass quickly or easily.

National Post