aven ir ▁du ▁Québec ▁et ▁de ▁l ' ent ente ▁sign ée ▁le ▁ 1 2 ▁juin ▁ 1 9 9 5 ?" ▁ ▁The ▁question ▁came ▁under ▁immediate ▁fire ▁from ▁federal ists , ▁who ▁had ▁no ▁input ▁in ▁the ▁draft ing . ▁Quebec ▁Liberal ▁leader ▁Daniel ▁Johnson ▁stated ▁it ▁was ▁confusing ▁and ▁at ▁the ▁very ▁least ▁should ▁have ▁contained ▁the ▁word ▁" country ." ▁Prom inent ▁federal ists ▁argued ▁that ▁the ▁refer endum ▁question ▁should ▁not ▁have ▁mentioned ▁" part ners hip " ▁propos als , ▁because ▁no ▁Canadian ▁political ▁leaders ▁outside ▁Quebec ▁had ▁shown ▁any ▁interest ▁in ▁negoti ating ▁a ▁possible ▁partners hip ▁agreement ▁with ▁an ▁independent ▁Quebec , ▁and ▁arg u ably ▁no ▁entity ▁capable ▁of ▁undert aking ▁such ▁negoti ations ▁actually ▁existed . ▁ ▁Other ▁federal ists ▁argued ▁that ▁the ▁question ▁err one ously ▁imp lied ▁an ▁agreement ▁had ▁been ▁reached ▁between ▁Canada ▁and ▁Quebec ▁regarding ▁a ▁partners hip ▁on ▁June ▁ 1 2 , ▁ 1 9 9 5 . ▁Par ize au ▁would ▁later ▁express ▁regret ▁that ▁the ▁agreement ▁had ▁to ▁be ▁c ited ▁in ▁the ▁question , ▁but ▁noted ▁that ▁the ▁June ▁ 1 2 , ▁ 1 9 9 5 ▁agreement ▁had ▁been ▁sent ▁to ▁every ▁registered ▁vot er ▁in ▁the ▁province . ▁ ▁Camp aign ▁ ▁Part icip ants ▁▁ ▁P urs u ant ▁to ▁Quebec ' s ▁Refer endum ▁Act ▁( en act ed ▁by ▁the ▁National ▁Assembly ▁prior ▁to ▁the ▁refer endum ▁of ▁ 1 9 8 0 ), ▁the ▁campaign ▁would