A two-state solution for Canada?

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
What would be your thoughts on Quebec voluntarily separating from Canada but sharing a common citizenship and passport?

Pros and cons?
 

Trotz

Electoral Member
May 20, 2010
893
1
18
Alberta
"Dual Dominion of Canada", "Canada-Quebec", with Austro-Hungary as a source of inspiration.

Queen can remain the titular head of state with Anglo-Canada with their own Prime Minister and Quebec with their own Prime Minister. Federal Parliament in Ottawa dissolved and new capitals established in Toronto and Quebec. Ontario broken up into Northern and Southern Ontario.

Common monetary, foreign policy and citizenship visa but that is as far as it should go, imo.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
"Dual Dominion of Canada", "Canada-Quebec", with Austro-Hungary as a source of inspiration.

Queen can remain the titular head of state with Anglo-Canada with their own Prime Minister and Quebec with their own Prime Minister. Federal Parliament in Ottawa dissolved and new capitals established in Toronto and Quebec. Ontario broken up into Northern and Southern Ontario.

In Austro-Hungary, Galicia remained a part of the Austrian Part of the country even though there was no land border, a similar arrangement could work for the Maritimes unless we aim for a three state solution.

If we all agreed to at least sharing a common citizenship, then there would be no need for a three-state solution (unless the East coast wanted that of course) since anyone from the East coast and the rest of English Canada could freely cross Quebec at will to get to the other side.
 

Trotz

Electoral Member
May 20, 2010
893
1
18
Alberta
If we all agreed to at least sharing a common citizenship, then there would be no need for a three-state solution (unless the East coast wanted that of course) since anyone from the East coast and the rest of English Canada could freely cross Quebec at will to get to the other side.

I edited my post remembering that Galicia did border Bohemia (though not Austria proper) but I did mention a common citizenship regime in the edited post.
Regards,
Trotz.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Another advantage of the common-citizenship proposal would be that English-Canada could also benefit from Quebec's skilled workforce, on English-Canada's terms of course (i.e. that Quebecers travelling outside their nation into English Canada would be subject to English-Canadian laws).

"Dual Dominion of Canada", "Canada-Quebec", with Austro-Hungary as a source of inspiration.

Queen can remain the titular head of state with Anglo-Canada with their own Prime Minister and Quebec with their own Prime Minister. Federal Parliament in Ottawa dissolved and new capitals established in Toronto and Quebec. Ontario broken up into Northern and Southern Ontario.

Common monetary, foreign policy and citizenship visa but that is as far as it should go, imo.

First off, I wouldn't be surprised if Quebec became a republic of sorts at least. I say 'of sorts' since Canadian citizenship is in fact based on pledging allegiance to the Queen. Tough I suppose Quebec could adopt a policy similar to India. In other words, it becomes a republic but still remains a member of the Commonwealth, of which the monarch remains head. That would likely be a more than reasonable compromise.

As for common monetary and foreign policy, I don't think we'd need to worry about that in the initial stages, as any kind of common-citizenship agreement would likely naturally force a common monetary and foreign policy anyway, seeing that to have a common citizenship without a common monetary and foreign policy could prove somewhat unwieldy anyway. So I think a common monetary and foreign policy would naturally come out of any kind of common-citizenship agreement without us needing to force this on Quebec.

I could see another benefit coming out of this too. Such a relationship would likely prompt many in Quebec and France to exploit the new relationship to build much closer ties between one another, with our common citizenship with Quebec forcing Quebec to still maintain close ties with Canada too. This would likely benefit Canada indirectly in that the closer relations between Quebec and France would likely promote economic development in both countries, with residents of English Canada being free to move to Quebec to benefit from this new reality.

At the same time, English-Canada would likely profit from this to build closer ties with England and other English-speaking countries, again benefiting the participants on that side too, and again with Quebecers being able to benefit from it by freely seeking out new economic opportunities in English Canada.

I could see plenty of benefits to such an arrangement.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
A split is a split - clean and final

English-Canada itself would benefit from such a shared relationship. After all, imagine the chaos and unemployment that a total split would cause on both sides of the Ontario-Quebec border, right where a significant portion of both populations live. Why hurt ourselves just to hurt Quebec? What's the point of that? Seems kind of sadistic to me.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
It's not something I'd want to happen and I think they probably like the idea even less, sort of like the 5 year old child who threatens to leave home.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
It's not something I'd want to happen and I think they probably like the idea even less, sort of like the 5 year old child who threatens to leave home.

Not something I'd necessarily want to happen either. However, with hate seeming to rise on both sides of the border, it could happen. And if it should happen, I'd rather we have a plan of action anyway, some kind of rational offer that could be acceptable and beneficial to both sides so as to minimize the damage, rather than have the extremists on both sides act out a hate on for each other leading to severe harm done to both sides.

It's like having an emergency evacuation plan. You don't hope for the building burn down or for any other kind of emergency, but you have a plan in place anyway so that if it does, you won't be taken by surprise.

Now, in the event that Quebec should ever decide to separate, would it not be preferable to have a well thought out plan of action already in place just waiting to be implemented, or would it be better for us to dance by the seat of our pants in total chaos?

We should consider too that any bad relations between Canada and Quebec would likely hurt Canada-US relations as the US tries to isolate itself from our problems. Looking at it that way, a peaceful and friendly separation on a sound policy foundation would be more likely to preserve friendly relations between Canada and the US, which would be absolutely crucial to Canada's and Quebec's economies.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
English-Canada itself would benefit from such a shared relationship. After all, imagine the chaos and unemployment that a total split would cause on both sides of the Ontario-Quebec border, right where a significant portion of both populations live. Why hurt ourselves just to hurt Quebec? What's the point of that? Seems kind of sadistic to me.
What chaos and unemployment? Wasn't it Parizeau who said the majority of Quebec business is mom and pop operations?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
What chaos and unemployment? Wasn't it Parizeau who said the majority of Quebec business is mom and pop operations?

I don't know. But even if that is the case, imagine businesses on both sides of the border relying on markets on the other side too. Clearly a total split would certainly hurt those businesses, mom-and-pop or not.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Not something I'd necessarily want to happen either. However, with hate seeming to rise on both sides of the border, it could happen. And if it should happen, I'd rather we have a plan of action anyway, some kind of rational offer that could be acceptable and beneficial to both sides so as to minimize the damage, rather than have the extremists on both sides act out a hate on for each other leading to severe harm done to both sides.

It's like having an emergency evacuation plan. You don't hope for the building burn down or for any other kind of emergency, but you have a plan in place anyway so that if it does, you won't be taken by surprise.

Now, in the event that Quebec should ever decide to separate, would it not be preferable to have a well thought out plan of action already in place just waiting to be implemented, or would it be better for us to dance by the seat of our pants in total chaos?

We should consider too that any bad relations between Canada and Quebec would likely hurt Canada-US relations as the US tries to isolate itself from our problems. Looking at it that way, a peaceful and friendly separation on a sound policy foundation would be more likely to preserve friendly relations between Canada and the US, which would be absolutely crucial to Canada's and Quebec's economies.

I agree................up to a point. I think if there was "total chaos" it would be them more than the rest of Canada.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
I agree................up to a point. I think if there was "total chaos" it would be them more than the rest of Canada.

Judging my population, they'd likely suffer 4 times more than we would (unless of course they manage to find an alternative market more quickly than us, be it by joining the EU if the EU would take them, or some other kind of strategy). That still doesn't change the fact that we'd suffer too.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
I don't know. But even if that is the case, imagine businesses on both sides of the border relying on markets on the other side too. Clearly a total split would certainly hurt those businesses, mom-and-pop or not.
For the most part, I think the Ottawa River and some harsh feelings already do that.
 

weaselwords

Electoral Member
Nov 10, 2009
518
4
18
salisbury's tavern
Pardon me, but isn't that what we have today in Canada given the breakdown in the commons, the caveats in the BNA & the ability of the National Assembly to enact preferential legislation to ensure the "Quebec Identity" (language, culture, etal)
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
A division of Canada would not just effect Canada. There are far more issues than just forming 2-3 or more semi independent or independent countries.


Ever-louder rumblings north of the border should not be dismissed as another Canadian nonevent. Potentially, they portend much greater consequences for American interests than many nationalist breakups around the world. Canada's dilemma, typically put, is the separation of Quebec. At least since the abortive rebellions of 1837-38, Quebecers seemingly have been revolting against Canada. The question has always been, "Will Quebec separate?" After a recent referendum in Quebec almost answered yes, Canadians have begun to ask other questions in more heated tones, such as, "Should Quebec be partitioned?" "For other Francophones and the rest of us," wrote Diane Francis, editor of The Financial Post, "[partition of Quebec] would rid this country of troublemakers who do not value Canada or its citizenship and who play fast and loose with the rule of law and minority rights." Quebecers, for their part, call partition dangerous, nonviable, undemocratic, and contrary to law. They regard it as a precedent that would threaten the geopolitical balance in North America. So the tensions increase.


Will Canada Unravel? Plotting a Map if Quebec Secedes | Foreign Affairs
 

Trotz

Electoral Member
May 20, 2010
893
1
18
Alberta
Pardon me, but isn't that what we have today in Canada given the breakdown in the commons, the caveats in the BNA & the ability of the National Assembly to enact preferential legislation to ensure the "Quebec Identity" (language, culture, etal)

Weaselwords, you are quite correct.

Hence the reason why most of our "Liberal Party" Prime Ministers had came from or practiced law in Quebec.
A dual state Initiative would never come from Quebec (despite the BQ) because most in Quebec don't wish to see an end to the gravy train or state bilingualism which gives them preferential access to government and military jobs from Victoria to St. John.


Rather such an initiative would come from Western Canada and from Steven Harper if he manages to attain a majority.

What chaos and unemployment? Wasn't it Parizeau who said the majority of Quebec business is mom and pop operations?

Is the military a mom and pop operation? We might not have a massive army like the United States but we still manufactur our "shock and awe" toys in Quebec.

Are these mom and pop stores?

1. CAE Inc (Montreal)
2. Rheinthall-Canada (Quebec City)
3. Bombardier (Montreal)
4. GDC (Toronto and Montreal)
5. SNC-Lavalin Group (Quebec)
6.
Héroux-Devtek Inc (Quebec)
7.
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Ltd (Mirabel - Montreal)
8. Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp (Montreal)


Are you kidding yourself? What industrial capacity we still have left is essentially split between Ontario and Quebec, the only thing left in the west are transit fees, lumber, oil and grain and the Maritimes is essentially a little bit of industry with fishing.

It's Quebec who has the most to lose if it became isolated from Canada and North America. Nothing bad could ever happen to Western Canada unless something managed to knock out the United States, China and Europe in one go.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
For the most part, I think the Ottawa River and some harsh feelings already do that.

To an extent. To establish an impenetrable border would aggravate matters even more though.

nope, you're either with us fully or you're completely separated, no help from the rest of us.

And what about 'you scratch my back and I scratch yours' type of collaboration. Maintaining common citizenship would not just benefit Quebec (though of course it would benefit them too, but that's not a reason to hurt ourselves just to hurt them), but it would also benefit us too. Remember that some from outside Quebec might have the qualifications to find good jobs in Quebec. Even with a separate Quebec, the Maritimes might want to remain with Canada, and if that happens a shared citizenship would certainly streamline bureaucracy at the borders when a Maritimer decides to get on his motorbike and drive though Quebec to get to Ontario. It would also make it easier for businessmen in the Maritimes to exploit the Quebec market (after all, wich common citizenship, they could exploit the Quebec market just as a Quebec resident could; heck they could even become Quebec residents themselves). Remember, Quebec has about 1/4 Canada's population, so while Quebec would suffer more than the rest of Canada overall, chances are the Maritimes, separated from the rest of Canada and having a much smaller population than even Quebec, would likely suffer even more than Quebec. So clearly sharing a common citizenship would not be about giving anything to Quebec, but rather about looking after our own butts.

The fact that Quebec would benefit from it too would just be an added bonus (or a negative side effect depending on one's feelings towards Quebec). But really, do Canadians hate Quebec so much that they'd be prepared to suffer themselves with the sole purpose of making Quebec suffer. Don't tell me our country comprises such sadists.

A division of Canada would not just effect Canada. There are far more issues than just forming 2-3 or more semi independent or independent countries.


Ever-louder rumblings north of the border should not be dismissed as another Canadian nonevent. Potentially, they portend much greater consequences for American interests than many nationalist breakups around the world. Canada's dilemma, typically put, is the separation of Quebec. At least since the abortive rebellions of 1837-38, Quebecers seemingly have been revolting against Canada. The question has always been, "Will Quebec separate?" After a recent referendum in Quebec almost answered yes, Canadians have begun to ask other questions in more heated tones, such as, "Should Quebec be partitioned?" "For other Francophones and the rest of us," wrote Diane Francis, editor of The Financial Post, "[partition of Quebec] would rid this country of troublemakers who do not value Canada or its citizenship and who play fast and loose with the rule of law and minority rights." Quebecers, for their part, call partition dangerous, nonviable, undemocratic, and contrary to law. They regard it as a precedent that would threaten the geopolitical balance in North America. So the tensions increase.


Will Canada Unravel? Plotting a Map if Quebec Secedes | Foreign Affairs

You do bring up a few good points:

1. Undoubtedly political and economic instability on the US' northern border would undoubtedly affect the US economy and US-Canada relations too. Looking at it that way, it would certainly be in the interest of both sides, if they must break apart, to do so on friendly terms, otherwise the US would likely choose to restrict its Northern border with Canada. Sure it would likely be counterproductive as it would merely isolate Canada even more, thus making it, and thus also the US, more fragile, but we all know human nature is not always rational. So yes, it would be in Canada's and Quebec's best interests to maintain friendly relations with one another.

2. Should Quebec be allowed to separate from Canada, it goes without saying that any nation is free to separate from any other nation. Should Quebec's Northern Peoples or other First Nations be allowed to separate from Quebec, chances are there would be a revival of Native movements in New York, Vermont, and other bordering states.

3. From an international standpoint, chances are many countries would be at least sympathetic to First Nations' interests, especially seeing that we had not lived up to many of our treaty obligations ourselves. Quite frankly, I think that alone is one reason even hardcore Quebec separatists would be wary of separation, because it could turn out far from planned. Needless to say such a native movement would likely cause reverberations in Ontario too. Not to mention Nunavut.

On the plus side, owing to their small populations, they'd likely be looking at decentralized federation more than outright separation. This still doesn't change the fact it could mean a total redefinition of Canada as we know it, especially with how the rest of the world would perceive Canada afterwards depending on how we dealt with the Quebec, First Nations and Inuit questions.

4. Regardless though of whether Canada split into two, three, or even multiple countries, it would be in everyone's interest to still maintain friendly ties and common citizenship at least, so as to maintain at least some stability after the aftermath of such a restructuring. Otherwise, a total breakdown of Canadian society would likely spill over into the Northern States, at least to a moderate degree.

Weaselwords, you are quite correct.

Hence the reason why most of our "Liberal Party" Prime Ministers had came from or practiced law in Quebec.
A dual state Initiative would never come from Quebec (despite the BQ) because most in Quebec don't wish to see an end to the gravy train or state bilingualism which gives them preferential access to government and military jobs from Victoria to St. John.


Rather such an initiative would come from Western Canada and from Steven Harper if he manages to attain a majority.



Is the military a mom and pop operation? We might not have a massive army like the United States but we still manufactur our "shock and awe" toys in Quebec.

Are these mom and pop stores?

1. CAE Inc (Montreal)
2. Rheinthall-Canada (Quebec City)
3. Bombardier (Montreal)
4. GDC (Toronto and Montreal)
5. SNC-Lavalin Group (Quebec)
6.
Héroux-Devtek Inc (Quebec)
7.
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Ltd (Mirabel - Montreal)
8. Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp (Montreal)


Are you kidding yourself? What industrial capacity we still have left is essentially split between Ontario and Quebec, the only thing left in the west are transit fees, lumber, oil and grain and the Maritimes is essentially a little bit of industry with fishing.

It's Quebec who has the most to lose if it became isolated from Canada and North America. Nothing bad could ever happen to Western Canada unless something managed to knock out the United States, China and Europe in one go.

First off, as for the transfer funds, clearly the two-state proposal would put an end to that. Sure they might share responsibility to fund the passport offices and citizenship issues and any other specific point on which there is a vested mutual interest in collaboration. Any area where the interest is not mutual would likely see no collaboration at all.

And seeing that Canada's manufacturing power is essentially split between Ontario and Queebc, you'd definitely want to ensure labour mobility so that workers can transfer between operations as required. Common citizenship would guarantee that labour mobility.

But I do agree that Quebec does stand more to gain than English Canada from collaboration, just as it stands more to lose in a showdown. That said, should we look more specifically at specific regions, then we could argue that the Maritimes would stand even more to gain or lose than Quebec.

A division of Canada would not just effect Canada. There are far more issues than just forming 2-3 or more semi independent or independent countries.


Ever-louder rumblings north of the border should not be dismissed as another Canadian nonevent. Potentially, they portend much greater consequences for American interests than many nationalist breakups around the world. Canada's dilemma, typically put, is the separation of Quebec. At least since the abortive rebellions of 1837-38, Quebecers seemingly have been revolting against Canada. The question has always been, "Will Quebec separate?" After a recent referendum in Quebec almost answered yes, Canadians have begun to ask other questions in more heated tones, such as, "Should Quebec be partitioned?" "For other Francophones and the rest of us," wrote Diane Francis, editor of The Financial Post, "[partition of Quebec] would rid this country of troublemakers who do not value Canada or its citizenship and who play fast and loose with the rule of law and minority rights." Quebecers, for their part, call partition dangerous, nonviable, undemocratic, and contrary to law. They regard it as a precedent that would threaten the geopolitical balance in North America. So the tensions increase.


Will Canada Unravel? Plotting a Map if Quebec Secedes | Foreign Affairs

I think if major problems did occur in Canada, the US would have to maintain a cool head about it. Among other things:

1. The US would likely want to maintain any trade relations it currently has with Canada and expect the same in return, as per agreed-upon rules. After all, with all the chaos that could occur in Canada (assuming a worst-case scenario of course), the US would not want to throw even more chaos into the mix. By maintaining its current policy, it would be helping to maintain some sense of stability North of the border.

2. Beyond maintaining its current treaties with Canada, the US might have to keep a close eye on native demands within its own borders, bearing in mind international, even global, media attention, so as to deal with their concerns in a fair-minded manner.

3. Beyond putting out domestic fires possibly caused by Canadian separation, the US might also want to adopt an engaged neutral stance towards Canada. for instance, so as to maintain its neutrality, it might choose to withdraw from NORAD or NATO (maintaining economic ties might be good, but do you really want to be allied with a country potentially on the verge of civil war?). Again, we're assuming worst case scenario here and I doubt it would ever go this far, but again, having a plan in place still never hurts. As for engagement, the US might expect Canada to abide by all applicable international laws in the way each part deals with each other in any negotiations or conflicts, and might even have to be prepared to propose resolutions against Canada should Canada go too far (again in the event of an unlikely worst case scenario).

Beyond that though, I don't think there really would be much the US could do.

Sorry, there is one more thing the US could do I suppose, and that would be to try to integrate Canada into a larger North American entity similar to the EU. It would mean the US sacrificing some of its sovereignty to a moderate degree, but in exchange for most North American integration and thus increased continental stability. You would not want such an organization closing North America off to the rest of the world though, and would still have to maintain open trade with the rest of the world. Such a North American organization would supplement current world trade and not replace it.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
If they separate, they separate. No shared squat. They pay their portion of the national debt, they come up with their own money, their own travel documents, their own citizenship and they lose ALL advantages that they have being a part of Canada. Period!