My two favourite candidates weren't even in the top tier.

Despite the hoopla about the advent of the Stephane Dion era, I don't see clear sailing for the federal Liberals.

New leader Dion is seen as a strong Quebec federalist and proponent of environmental action. Most people like him. Hell, I like him.

But he's no Scott Brison, with his conservative Maritime and business reality; or Ken Dryden, who knows the values of team work in order to survive (or at least from getting a puck in the face).

In fact, during the prolonged leadership campaign, the party seemed to have been backsliding to the old ways - with its reluctant Quebec base, and muddling on ideology of opportunity and providing services we can't afford. Saturday's Muddle in Montreal proved it.

The Liberals rejected central Canada, its one western candidate, Gerard Kennedy; and the Maritimes, represented by Brison. It rejected moving ahead - a direction former prime minister Paul Martin had already set on.

Stephane Dion is a former Jean Chretien cabinet minister. Chretien recruited him, promoted him. We don't have to think too deeply about the sponsorship scandal or Canada/ U.S./ British relations to be refreshed on what that means: bad news.

It was also telling the prime interview by the country's major private broadcaster after the choice was made Saturday evening was with none other than Chretien.

One would have thought Chretien would have been whisked away and kept out of sight - and definitely out of mind.

Paul Martin - the man who could have cleaned up the party - was so tarred by the Chretien legacy, he lost to the Tories earlier this year. Yet, the party allowed Chretien to be front and centre Saturday evening.

The message is clear, and it couldn't have come at a worse time.

At first, as Prime Minister Stephen Harper noted recently, the country is beginning to understand we're known by our accomplishments and the sacrifices we've made to realize them; not by a service or the services we use.

There appears to be a change in attitude in the country. Somehow, being public health care consumers and not participating in the bungled Iraq intervention aren't enough.

This brings us to look further into the long-coming de facto recognition of the Quebecois people as a nation within a united Canada and what it's going to mean.

The wording involves the French-speaking Quebecois, but in reality it's the whole province - again, at least within the federation. Let's not kid ourselves.

It may take a while, but other provinces will start treating the whole province as though it is a “nation� - again, in the French meaning, but that will be enough to cause some division.

The new situation won't be anywhere near a “no more Mr. Nice-guy� attitude among the other provinces, but it will likely be more benign - though real.

It definitely won't be like the apartheid-era South African government setting up separate little ethnic entities in places such as Venda, Transkei and Ciskei. Those were exploitive entities to keep African numbers down in the rest of South Africa, while using the labour from the territories and not providing services.

That said, great care has to be taken to ensure each entity doesn't hive off on its own.

Was it out of character for the new Tories to have brought forth the “nation� motion - which just about everyone else quickly supported? No.

As one pundit noted, this isn't out of keeping with the old Reform Party view on provincial rights and bilingualism. Greater freedoms and responsibilities to the provinces was a strong point in their view.

It could well mean the other regions will feel freer to follow a certain foreign policy, social program trend or an international environmental accord - or not - without worrying about attitudes in Quebec anymore.

Truthfully, we have embarked on a number of things - trade, environment, the international terror emergency - that don't and can't revolve around what one province wants or doesn't.

Though nothing has changed legally or constitutionally, we have to be aware of the perceptions - particularly of how they will develop.

The idea Quebec is different - “separate� is too strong, but there - is now implanted in people's minds. It could well mean we're gradually becoming less Quebec-oriented.

This means a lot politically. For one - and this is extremely important to Dion - there could be no more prime ministers from Quebec.