Now that the Bloc Québécois has announced it will support Stephen Harper's motion that "This House recognize that the Québécois form a nation," all four parliamentary parties are now in favour of this rather stunning departure from constitutional norms. Given that no party is opposed to this position, one would think it represents an overwhelming consensus among Canadian voters. There is an overwhelming consensus, but it is diametrically opposed to this motion. It is the view of the majority of Canadians who believe in "One Canada" -- who represents us? Have we ever before had a situation where no one in Parliament dares voice an opinion held by millions of fellow citizens?

There are certainly substantive grounds to oppose the motion: No one has yet defined what "Québécois" means. Are we speaking about French-speaking Canadians? Or French-speaking Quebeckers? Or all Quebeckers? If all Quebeckers who live within the territorial boundaries of Quebec are a nation, then are all Manitobans a nation? If not, then, are Acadians a nation? Are Franco-Ontarians a nation? Nobody knows. They haven't defined the concept because all parties are interested in ambiguity, rather than clarity. Define the term as you wish, and let's hope for the best.

After studying the concept of "nation" for two years, the Council of Europe concluded "that it was difficult, not to say impossible, to arrive at a common definition of the concept of nation." Some assemblies, at least, are more fastidious than our House of Commons.

Some argue, too, that this semantic sleight of hand is only symbolic. That in the end it will not mean anything. If anyone is under this illusion, they underestimate the tenacity of Quebec nationalists. Gilles Duceppe now says he will support the motion because it serves "Quebec's superior interest."

"It is always better, when we are fighting for a sovereign Quebec," he told the press, "that Canada recognize that Quebeckers are a nation." Parti Québécois Leader André Boisclair has chimed in: "Distinct society is now a null-and-void notion. There is no going back . . . it will give us a powerful tool for the international recognition of a future sovereign Quebec." We are blindly following a path toward the cliff of separation.

These risks didn't seem to bother our Parliamentary leaders. But there is another calculation that entered into their decision-making and that has been little commented on -- the dimension of politics.

The Bloc will do anything to discredit federalism, so they were happy to create mischief, with a motion that Quebec was a nation. The Conservatives hope to improve their electoral position in Quebec, and Mr. Harper thinks his championing of the motion will appease Quebec nationalists. The Liberals are involved in a leadership race, where delegate votes from Quebec are crucial. The NDP has been for special status since 1960, so they are happy to go along for the ride. Everyone is chasing the elusive votes of Quebec nationalists. On that axis, apparently, all of our political class spins.

But what about the Canadian majority? A CBC-Environics poll earlier this month revealed that 57 per cent of Canadians did not think Quebec was a nation, and 70 per cent opposed constitutional recognition of that notion (83 per cent of the respondents outside of Quebec oppose constitutional recognition). Even in Quebec, 34 per cent of the respondents did not think Quebec was a nation; in comparison, the Liberal Party received 21 per cent of the vote in Quebec in January's federal election -- do we need a calculator to do the electoral math?

The poll shows that there is still an overwhelming majority of Canadians who favour the idea of "One Canada." And what about the Liberal Party, the traditional defender of One Canada, since Wilfrid Laurier? Another poll, the SES National Survey, determined that "Quebec as a nation" was a particular albatross for the Liberal Party: 16 per cent of Canadians would be more likely to vote Liberal if the Party recognized Quebec as a nation, but 40 per cent would be less likely. In Ontario, the key swing province, 10 per cent would be more likely to vote Liberal, and 54 per cent would be less likely. For a party that puts a premium on winning, these results should give the enthusiasts pause.

One Canada is still the choice of most Canadians, including a large minority in Quebec. The Liberal Party should think very carefully before it throws away a principled position that is logically coherent, and politically intelligent. The vast majority of Canadians do not support a Canada subdivided into undefined nations.

Thomas Axworthy is chair of the Centre for the Study of Democracy at Queens University. Serge Joyal and Jerry S. Grafstein are Liberal senators.

Bell Globemedia © Copyright 2006 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.