They will do so because it is the best option for them and for future generations.
The close results of the last referendum are probably behind the federal government's decision to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court on the legality of Quebec's sovereignty.
This reference to the Supreme Court of Canada is in line with the federal strategy that subordinates the legitimate right of the people of Quebec to accede democratically to sovereignty to the rule of law.
Both the Bloc Quebecois and the Quebec government have always said that accession to sovereignty is above all a political matter and not one that should be decided by the courts.
Oddly enough, in August 1995, shortly before the last referendum held in Quebec, the Minister of Justice said in a public statement that it was important to respect the democratic vote of Quebecers on the matter of sovereignty. To him it was a political, not a legal question.
I think it is also surprising that last spring, the Minister of Justice said that the federal government's participation in the Bertrand case was basically motivated by the involvement of the provincial government.
Since the Quebec government has withdrawn from this case, why has he now decided not only to withdraw from the Bertrand case but to pursue the matter alone before the Supreme Court?
It is because of the close results of the last referendum that the federal government is now asking the Supreme Court for its opinion on the legality of Quebec sovereignty. Resorting to the Supreme Court is part of the federal government's plan B strategy
which involves making the legitimacy of Quebecers' democratic accession to sovereignty subordinate to the rule of law.
Now that it is afraid of losing, the federal government is trying to throw doubt on the entire Quebec referendum process and to impose its own referendum laws. The feds have lost the political battle and are turning to the courts in order to save face.
The federal government's justification for its reference to the Supreme Court is based essentially on the concept of the rule of law.
However, when referendums were called in 1980 and 1995, this did not meet with legal objections from the federal government, which was, in fact, a major participant.
We saw this as a political acknowledgment of the process initiated by Quebec for its accession to sovereignty. In fact, it also acknowledged the legitimacy of the exercise initiated by the Government of Quebec.
The federal government must realize that the rule of law should always be justified by a respect for the democratic values and principles that prevail in our society. The rule of law should never take precedence over the will and the legitimate right of the people of Quebec to accede democratically to sovereignty.
We have said many times, and I say it again today, that the exercise initiated by the province of Quebec needs no definition by the courts.