Should the rest of us be worried?

With Quebec at the midpoint of a fiery election campaign, talk of sovereignty, referendums, passports and borders has taken centre stage. How worried should you be? Here’s a layman’s guide: Q: Should I care about this election?

A: Quebec elections always matter to the entire country, given that the Parti Québécois could be returned as the province’s government. If it were to win a majority, talk of a referendum on leaving Canada could quickly heat up, despite PQ Leader Pauline Marois’s reassuring comments on the campaign trail that she’d do a lot of consulting before taking such a step. So yes, you should follow some of the issues.

“It’s the burden of being Canadian,” said David Schneiderman, professor of law at the University of Toronto. “Some people in the mid-90s were actively contemplating (a country without Quebec) in the rest of Canada as a good thing. We might have a conversation like that again. You never know.” Q: I thought sovereignty wasn’t supposed to be the big issue in this election. Why is everyone talking about it? A: In 2012, the PQ, historically a sovereignty party, regained power in Quebec for the first time since losing the 2003 election to Jean Charest’s Liberals. While this immediately sparked new discussion around sovereignty, Marois had hoped much of this campaign would focus not on independence directly, but on her government’s Charter of Values, which, among other things, would prohibit the wearing of identifiable religious attire while working in the public sector.

She is on record as saying that her party would present Quebec with a “white paper” to gauge interest on a possible split from Canada.

But her attempt to deal with Quebec’s future indirectly, through the values charter, was abruptly derailed when the PQ unveiled star candidate Pierre Karl Peladeau, who said he wanted to “make Quebec a country.” Hard to avoid the topic after that fistpumping proclamation from a charismatic candidate. Q: Does placing the topic at the centre of the election help the PQ or the Liberals? A: The polls suggest that the PQ hurts itself when it takes an aggressive approach to sovereignty. A CROP poll published in Montreal’s La Presse on March 18 said 67 per cent of Quebec residents don’t want a third referendum.

A poll released by Leger-Le Devoir March 16 showed that, were a referendum to be held at the moment of the survey, 59 per cent of people would vote “No” and 41 per cent would vote “Yes.” Support does not seem to be very high for separation at the moment.

“There has always been, over the last 40 years, between 30 and 40 per cent of Quebecers who are in favour of sovereignty,” said Michel Ducharme, associate professor of history at the University of British Columbia. “The numbers have been quite steady in this regard.” Q: But let’s say Marois won, and support for a referendum went up for some reason. The sovereignty movement almost won the 1995 referendum. What’s the process? Last time, no one seemed to know. A: “These kinds of situations can be difficult to deal with in strictly legal terms,” said Carissima Mathen, associate professor of law at the University of Ottawa. “It’s a political issue that will be very dependent on the specific factors in play.”

The biggest difference between any future referendum and the 1995 one is the federal Clarity Act. The Act, passed into law in 2000, says a referendum question will have to be clear and that the House of Commons will have to determine if it was endorsed with a clear majority (unfortunately, the term “clear majority” is open to interpretation).

Additionally, any province seceding from Canada requires that the Canadian Constitution be changed. This is why the Clarity Act is important: Unless its conditions are met by Quebec, other Canadians would be unlikely to go for changing the Constitution.

But there’s no consensus on whether the provinces would have to unanimously agree on any constitutional changes, or if changes could simply go through with the approval of seven provinces, representing 50 per cent or more of the population, which is sometimes a standard for constitutional change.

“There’s some disagreement about that,” said Schneiderman. “Unanimity is probably what would be expected in this kind of event.”

Meanwhile, both Alberta and British Columbia would have to undergo a referendum of their own: It’s the law in both provinces that the population must approve constitutional change. Q: Can Quebec ignore the Constitution? A: If the constitutional route doesn’t work out, Quebec could attempt to appeal to international law to support its leaving Canada. It could try to get other countries to recognize it officially.

But Schneiderman noted that this route is usually reserved for the secession of oppressed or unfairly treated populations.

If Canada has negotiated in good faith, Quebec likely won’t succeed in taking this approach.

All of this gets even further confused by Bill 99 in Quebec. It’s provincial legislation that states that only Quebec’s government can rule on its population’s democratic will. That bill is currently the subject of a court challenge. Conclusion? “We’d totally be in uncharted territory, for us,” said Mathen. “But the idea is that we have a tradition of peaceful transitions … and that would be the expectation, I think, of everyone involved.” Q: We’re getting ahead of ourselves, but let’s say all this legal stuff is settled. What are some of the practical hurdles for an independent Quebec? A: Start with the economy. Would Canada allow Quebec to use the national currency (indeed, could it stop this)? How could Quebec pay down its provincial debt — $175.5 billion in provincial debt and $121.2 billion in Quebec’s share of the national debt, according to the Fraser Institute?

Would aboriginal communities try to leave Quebec, invoking their constitutional treaty rights to remain a part of Canada? What would then happen to Quebec’s territory?

There’s also the issue of whether Quebec and Canada would share open borders. Would Canadians and Quebecers alike be free to pass through unimpeded? Or would Canada require a Quebec-issued passport to allow access to the country?

Marois has hinted that citizens of either country would be free to come and go as they pleased, although Quebec-issued passports would still be required.

“For the last 40 years, people have discussed how to win a referendum. There has been almost no discussion about what would happen the next day,” Ducharme added, saying that the lack of discussion is because sovereignty-oriented leaders “don’t agree with themselves” beyond their belief that Quebec should be independent. Q: Would all Anglophones leave the province? Would there be an influx of people to the West? A: Since the whole point of sovereignty is to maintain the francophone culture, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see some anglophones marginalized and fed up with the situation.

But the discussion of a referendum isn’t exactly new, so Ducharme doesn’t believe there would be a big difference.

“My guess is that the English-speaking people who wanted to leave Quebec have already done it,” he said. Q: Will this ever end, regardless of election outcome? A: Unlikely. There will always be those who hope to make Quebec its own country.

“I know that people want an end,” said Schneiderman, “but it’s naive to think there would be … it will be a perpetual thing that we will have to work through. It’s never going to go away, this kind of threat.”

Still, there are so many stumbling blocks and hurdles to separatism that it doesn’t make much sense to get worried just now.

“I would not lose sleep over it,” said Ducharme, “and I don’t.” Q: Who should I keep an eye on? A: Pauline Marois. The leader of the PQ, if she survived this election, would spearhead any move to separate.

Pierre Karl Peladeau. The president of Quebecor Inc. and now a PQ candidate, is a polarizing figure, who could galvanize both sovereignty supporters and opponents.

Philippe Couillard. Should the Liberal leader emerge victorious from this election, referendum fears would fade — this time.

Tom Mulcair. If any federal politician seems likely to play a meaningful role in the sovereignty debate, it’s the federal NDP leader. Mulcair has been a cabinet minister in Quebec, with credibility among its residents. His NDP affiliation can’t hurt, either, given the party’s surge in the province during the 2011 federal elections.