The PM's new Quebec lieutenant

Question. Does Jean Lapierre speak for the government of Canada? Specifically, when he says of the Clarity Act,

"It's useless because it wouldn't change anything. If there was a will in Quebec, a clear will to separate, they would not be able to stop a will like that by trying to have tricks."

are we to take it that the government of Canada would acquiesce in a coup d'�tat? Of course, the whole point of the Clarity Act is to ensure that there is a "clear will to separate" before agreeing to sit down to negotiations, which would seem the bare minimum -- too much, in fact. In virtually every other country on earth, there is no right of secession, period -- it doesn't matter how clear anyone's will is. That doesn't mean that other countries wouldn't negotiation secession, in extremis: if the seceding territory had become ungovernable. But they don't say so ahead of time, and they don't legitimize the idea, as we have done, to the point that every stray premier with a bone to pick with the feds invokes the spectre of separatism. But back to Lapierre. I can well imagine what Stephen Harper would have made of this, in another era. But now that he's busy hiring "former" separatists as his organizers in Quebec, the better to fend off Belinda's millions, I suppose he doesn't have time.... UPDATE: The Prime Minister tells a televised "town hall" the Clarity Act will not be revoked. "It's the law," he says. Now there's a stirring defense. Besides, "while I'm prime minister, there will never be a referendum because we're going to have the kind of country where Quebecers will want to build a stronger Canada." Oh, well then. As long as he's prime minister, all is well. The man on the white horse. Et puis?