Little solace, moreover, can be gained in tracing English rancor to a feeling that the price for getting Quebec to sign on to Meech Lake (allegedly at great cost to federal power) was a free-trade agreement with the United States that most English Canadians regarded as a sellout of their country's sovereignty; or in tracing French Canadian disdain to a perception in Quebec that Meech Lake was initially foisted on it by the federal government in Ottawa. Why, then, were the English so dead set against it? And since they were, surely it was worth preserving. In Canadian political scientist Philip Resnick's recently published "Letters to a Quebecois Friend," an "independiste" professor at Quebec University in Montreal, Daniel Latouche, characterized the "distinct society" clause in Meech Lake as "an affront to our political culture . . . . We all know it has absolutely no legal meaning, and that Quebec has no need for such a clause. It will poison further the atmosphere between our two nations for years to come, as we will come to expect great rewards from what is being presented to us as a great concession on your part." The crisis sparked by Meech Lake - one that will not end with its ratification - has evolved almost entirely beyond the realm of constitutionality. Meech Lake has become a symbol of national discontent. It is almost as if Canada, which had the good sense more than a century ago to send the Mounties out to make its frontier safe for settlement, now feels impelled to reinstate and relive a Wild West phase of its own.
People: Mulroney, Brian