Scottish Independence: Quebec Edition

[Malthus]

I'm not saying they are "null and void", I'm merely pointing out that Quebec already has plenty of room to arrange programs as it sees fit: Canada is relatively decentralized, for a country, with robust provincial powers.

The Federal parliament can still declare a provincial law null&void, IIRC.  Same power as Queen had prior to 1982.
Mulcair talked about using it against Quebec's charter, IIRC.  Of course, that was one of the main goal of the PQ charter.

The Federal government his by no right forced to follow provincial laws, and the english minority of Quebec has been historically protected by the Federal while the French communities outside of Quebec have been left to fend for themselves.

The Federal government can create it's own program anywhere it sees fit.  If the Federal government wishes to transfer funds to provinces on the exclusive condition that they do not fund climate or evolution research, they could theoritically do so (though such an extreme example would certainly create an uproar). 

One recent exemple were the Millenium grants.  The Federal government, after cutting fund transfer to provinces decided to create it's own student grant program.  With a Red Maple leaf on the check, so as to promote canadian unity among students. Why not increase provincial transfers to education instead of half duplicating an existing system and giving roughtly the same amount to students regardless if they needed it or not?

The infamous sponsorship scandal.  Do you think our tax dollars were justly spent in this?

The flag scandal.  Quebec being inundated by Canadian flags on July 1st.  Really?  That was an efficient use of our money?

Your examples seem to fall into three categories: (1) totally symbolic stuff (little red maple leaves on cheques? Canadian flags on our country's day? The horror! The Horror!!!), (2) completely theoretical possibilities (the feds *could* do this or that) or (3) stuff the Nationalist party attempted to do to deliberately *troll* the feds into doing something (use your powers or we will ritually humiliate these dirty foreigners, haw haw).

[viper37]

I think you are missing the point. I for one do not care what Quebec does with the money it gets from equalization - I care that Quebec has, consistently, over decades, essentially blackmailed the rest of the country into getting the lion's share of that money - in effect, a tax on the rest of us - because of its constant threats to break up the country if it doesn't get it. Evidence is that the feds constantly tinker with the (complex) funding formula to ensure that Quebec is paid at the expense of Ontario.

There is no blackmail.  The PQ lost the referendum in 1995.  It was impossible for them, despite what some are saying now, to hold a new referendum on the issue in 1996.  If anything, that fact has been exploited by the Federal government to cut transfer funds and change the equalization formula multiple times in Quebec disfavour.  After all, natural resources are excluded from the calculations of equalization payments, but hydro-electricity is not a natural resources...
And from 2003 to very recently, there as been a total of 0 majority independantist government.

But there could be autonomy and no perceived blackmail.

Combine that with boasting about how superior Quebec is because it is more socialist,

Because there's no boasting about the "most best country in the world"?  Let me raise en eyebrow here...

Yes, Quebec is more socialist - it can afford to be, because the rest of us are paying for it, meaning the non-Quebec provinces can't afford the same programs!

Only part of it is true.  You forget the other part: we are the most heavily taxed state on this continent.

Sure, Quebec isn't the only one in this pot - the Altantic Provinces are too - but they are (1) very small, and (2) not lecturing everyone about the superiority of their system.

As I said, just stop the damn thing!  All we have to do is take 100% of our taxes and pay for the services we use.  We agree on the cost before hand, long term deal, renewable later on.  Using Canadian embassies to promote the goodness of tarsands does not benefit Quebec.  Having Harper boycott a climate panel where other leaders attend does not benefit Quebec.  Yet I pay the same for it...

[viper37]

I'm not saying they are "null and void", I'm merely pointing out that Quebec already has plenty of room to arrange programs as it sees fit: Canada is relatively decentralized, for a country, with robust provincial powers.

The Federal parliament can still declare a provincial law null&void, IIRC.  Same power as Queen had prior to 1982.
Mulcair talked about using it against Quebec's charter, IIRC.  Of course, that was one of the main goal of the PQ charter.

The Federal government his by no right forced to follow provincial laws, and the english minority of Quebec has been historically protected by the Federal while the French communities outside of Quebec have been left to fend for themselves.

The Federal government can create it's own program anywhere it sees fit.  If the Federal government wishes to transfer funds to provinces on the exclusive condition that they do not fund climate or evolution research, they could theoritically do so (though such an extreme example would certainly create an uproar). 

One recent exemple were the Millenium grants.  The Federal government, after cutting fund transfer to provinces decided to create it's own student grant program.  With a Red Maple leaf on the check, so as to promote canadian unity among students. Why not increase provincial transfers to education instead of half duplicating an existing system and giving roughtly the same amount to students regardless if they needed it or not?

The infamous sponsorship scandal.  Do you think our tax dollars were justly spent in this?

The flag scandal.  Quebec being inundated by Canadian flags on July 1st.  Really?  That was an efficient use of our money?

Your examples seem to fall into three categories: (1) totally symbolic stuff (little red maple leaves on cheques? Canadian flags on our country's day? The horror! The Horror!!!),

Unlike you, I am not fond of wasting money for frivoulous thing.  If Ontario wanted those flags, they could have kept them, instead of bitching we receive the lion's share in money transfer and government services.
I'd have gladly taken those subsidies to the auto industry - wich were denied for Quebec as a way to protect Ontario's industry - and all those federal research grant to universities and private corporations.
If I am to be forced into a socialist state, I sure want the benefits.

(2) completely theoretical possibilities (the feds *could* do this or that)

Wich is why we usually laws.  There are laws that make it illegal for me to kill anyone, even if I have no intention of killing anyone.

or (3) stuff the Nationalist party attempted to do to deliberately *troll* the feds into doing something (use your powers or we will ritually humiliate these dirty foreigners, haw haw).

There was no humiliation except in the heads of English Canadians and religious extremists.  But seeing how the Lev Tahor things turned, I'd sure want a clarification of what is expected from immigrants when they come to live here.

What there was though, was a fucked up proposed bill that would have made any lawyer in the province happy for the next 20 years.  At least.  And while I don't harbour any hard feeling toward the lawyers of this province, I do not believe we, as a society, should go out of our way to find them lucrative work opportunities at our expense.

[Barrister]

There is no blackmail.  The PQ lost the referendum in 1995.  It was impossible for them, despite what some are saying now, to hold a new referendum on the issue in 1996.  If anything, that fact has been exploited by the Federal government to cut transfer funds and change the equalization formula multiple times in Quebec disfavour.  After all, natural resources are excluded from the calculations of equalization payments, but hydro-electricity is not a natural resources...
And from 2003 to very recently, there as been a total of 0 majority independantist government.

But there could be autonomy and no perceived blackmail.

I find the word "blackmail" to be very negative and hostile in this context, and thus I don't use it.

But I can tell you that in negotiations over anything with Quebec, the issue of sovereignty always sneaks in.  Even when it's a federalist government, there's always the notion (sometimes explicitly stated, sometimes not) that if the federal government doesn't give Quebec what it wants, then "that will only play into the PQ's hands".

So to some, I guess it feels like blackmail.


As for the latest opinion polls still show a narrow but consistent lead for "No", 48-42%.

http://www.bbc.com/news/events/scotland-decides/poll-tracker

[Berkut]

Honestly, the only thing concrete I've heard from the pro-independence "crowd" is that they want more power to create a more intolerant society towards those who are not French enough, or god forbid, dirty furriners.

Coming from someone who though Chirac was my President not so long ago, I quite understand your distorted visions of Canadian politics...

I have no idea what that means.

My vision of Quebec politics is mostly informed by you and gallon and such.

And so far, the only concrete complaint I've seen is that you aren't allowed to discriminate against those who are not French enough. I am sure there are better reasons, surely there must be, but you've failed to articulate them with any specificity at all.

It is all very general - "we are different!".

Ok, you are different. Congrats. You are special unique snowflakes. So are Mormons, or Hispanics or Texans. You seem to manage be special and different in Canada for a very long time, and I am sure you will continue to be special and different without dissolving Canada. So what us the problem that requires radical change (other than the Evil Feds not allowing you to persecute others to the extent grill on et al would like)?

Specifics?

[Malthus]

I'm not saying they are "null and void", I'm merely pointing out that Quebec already has plenty of room to arrange programs as it sees fit: Canada is relatively decentralized, for a country, with robust provincial powers.

The Federal parliament can still declare a provincial law null&void, IIRC.  Same power as Queen had prior to 1982.
Mulcair talked about using it against Quebec's charter, IIRC.  Of course, that was one of the main goal of the PQ charter.

The Federal government his by no right forced to follow provincial laws, and the english minority of Quebec has been historically protected by the Federal while the French communities outside of Quebec have been left to fend for themselves.

The Federal government can create it's own program anywhere it sees fit.  If the Federal government wishes to transfer funds to provinces on the exclusive condition that they do not fund climate or evolution research, they could theoritically do so (though such an extreme example would certainly create an uproar). 

One recent exemple were the Millenium grants.  The Federal government, after cutting fund transfer to provinces decided to create it's own student grant program.  With a Red Maple leaf on the check, so as to promote canadian unity among students. Why not increase provincial transfers to education instead of half duplicating an existing system and giving roughtly the same amount to students regardless if they needed it or not?

The infamous sponsorship scandal.  Do you think our tax dollars were justly spent in this?

The flag scandal.  Quebec being inundated by Canadian flags on July 1st.  Really?  That was an efficient use of our money?

Your examples seem to fall into three categories: (1) totally symbolic stuff (little red maple leaves on cheques? Canadian flags on our country's day? The horror! The Horror!!!),

Unlike you, I am not fond of wasting money for frivoulous thing.  If Ontario wanted those flags, they could have kept them, instead of bitching we receive the lion's share in money transfer and government services.
I'd have gladly taken those subsidies to the auto industry - wich were denied for Quebec as a way to protect Ontario's industry - and all those federal research grant to universities and private corporations.
If I am to be forced into a socialist state, I sure want the benefits.

(2) completely theoretical possibilities (the feds *could* do this or that)

Wich is why we usually laws.  There are laws that make it illegal for me to kill anyone, even if I have no intention of killing anyone.

or (3) stuff the Nationalist party attempted to do to deliberately *troll* the feds into doing something (use your powers or we will ritually humiliate these dirty foreigners, haw haw).

There was no humiliation except in the heads of English Canadians and religious extremists.  But seeing how the Lev Tahor things turned, I'd sure want a clarification of what is expected from immigrants when they come to live here.

I'm talking about $7 billion a year in transfer payments, and you are talking about little red maple leaves on cheques and flags. One of these things is ... more significant. 

The PQ's "Charter" plan did achieve one goal - it proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the PQ had an ugly parochial side to it - which is of course something I used to catch shit on this site for noting. Thanks, PQ. 

To the people of Quebec's credit, they saw this as well and rejected the PQ resoundingly.

What there was though, was a fucked up proposed bill that would have made any lawyer in the province happy for the next 20 years.  At least.  And while I don't harbour any hard feeling toward the lawyers of this province, I do not believe we, as a society, should go out of our way to find them lucrative work opportunities at our expense.

People say that like it's a bad thing. 

[viper37]

I'm talking about $7 billion a year in transfer payments, and you are talking about little red maple leaves on cheques and flags. One of these things is ... more significant. 

Maybe we would not receive 7 billion a year (for wich a good part is our money too, though I won't dispute the fact we receive more than we pay) if this federation was correctly decentralized and rest on clear seperation of powers?

The PQ's "Charter" plan did achieve one goal - it proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the PQ had an ugly parochial side to it - which is of course something I used to catch shit on this site for noting. Thanks, PQ. 

The PQ of 2014 is not really the same PQ as the one from 1998.  Two very different leader, many moderates have left over the years.
Many opportunists have joined.

People say that like it's a bad thing. 

yep.  You should push for something like that in Ontario, insuring your son's future and stuff like that

[Berkut]

I can certainly understand the frustration of people like Malthus. The problem here is that the Quebec crowd has convinced themselves that they are victims - they are "being strangled".

Well, every victim has to have an oppressor. So when they say they are being strangled, what they are saying is that people like Malthus are strangling them.

Pretty understandable that that is a role most people don't much care to be cast in, especially in a liberal democracy where the victims havew the exact same representation and rights as the supposed evil strangling oppressors.

[viper37]

Well, every victim has to have an oppressor. So when they say they are being strangled, what they are saying is that people like Malthus are strangling them.

Semantics.  Were the Southerners feeling oppressed by the Northerners or by the Federal government?  Did they loathe the Federal government or every citizen of the North?

[Berkut]

Well, every victim has to have an oppressor. So when they say they are being strangled, what they are saying is that people like Malthus are strangling them.

Semantics.  Were the Southerners feeling oppressed by the Northerners or by the Federal government?  Did they loathe the Federal government or every citizen of the North?

I think they loathed both. Plenty of examples of Yankees being attacked in the months leading up to the war for example.

Ironic that in your analogy you cast yourselves in the role of the south, fighting for "states rights".

Right to do what, in this case?

[Berkut]

I am sitting here in Toronto airport talking about this. Across the aisle from me us a French Canadian couple and a female friend. And both women are just seriously beautiful.

[viper37]

I have no idea what that means.

Back in EU-OT times.  When we were both moderators.  Because I was french speaking, you assumed Chirac was my President, you did not know who was Canada's prime minister, and you seemed unaware that there was a French speaking minority in Quebec.

Given this, and given this:

My vision of Quebec politics is mostly informed by you and gallon and such.

it seems you have distorted view of Canadian politics shaped by your opinion of the people talking about it rather than objective facts.

And so far, the only concrete complaint I've seen is that you aren't allowed to discriminate against those who are not French enough. I am sure there are better reasons, surely there must be, but you've failed to articulate them with any specificity at all.

And again, you are either ignorant of the facts, or you are distorting them on purpose, as many English Canadians like to do.  The English Speaking Quebecers have much more rights than any French speaking minority in Canada.

It is all very general - "we are different!".

Well you know, you could all be just one giant state down there instead of a multitude of tiny different territories with each their own laws and peculiar tax rules.

[Maximus]

it seems you have distorted view of Canadian politics shaped by your opinion of the people talking about it rather than objective facts.

The irony is strong in this one.

[viper37]

I think they loathed both. Plenty of examples of Yankees being attacked in the months leading up to the war for example.

Ironic that in your analogy you cast yourselves in the role of the south, fighting for "states rights".

Right to do what, in this case?

I'm not trying to cast myself in any role, I'm trying to give you an example that you will understand because your comprehesion of US history is better than your knowledge of Quebec & Canada's politics.

We do not hate English Canadians.  Well, sure, some do hate them, and you'll find people that hate Jews too, and people that hate Arabs, black, gays, and even gays that hate heteros.
To say they form a coherent majority of any political force is simply stupid.

We do not like the current power sharing agreement with the provinces and the Federal government.  Most provinces are happy the way things are, Quebec is not.  Alberta has its own issues, but now that they have a political party in power whose base is in their province, they have no real problems with the Federal government.

[Barrister]

I am sitting here in Toronto airport talking about this. Across the aisle from me us a French Canadian couple and a female friend. And both women are just seriously beautiful.

Heading to Edmonton again?