Here We Go Again

[mt_pockets1000]

Power play pits Quebec against Newfoundland

Where do headwaters of rugged Romaine River lie? Both provinces claim land where boundary has never been successfully surveyed


RHÉAL SÉGUIN
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
February 11, 2009 at 4:08 AM EST

QUEBEC — The federal government has sided with Quebec by agreeing to hear the province's argument that a multibillion-dollar hydroelectric project is on Quebec territory, land also claimed by Newfoundland and Labrador.


globeandmail.com: Power play pits Quebec against Newfoundland

When will this insanity end? How much more of this crap do we have to put up with before we lose it and take it to the next level? Unbelievable how such an important issue was left off the table during the 1949 negotiations.

 

[lone wolf]

According to Quebec history books, Labrador is ALL Quebec....

 

[TenPenny]

I've always thought it was crazy that the border was never properly defined. I suppose everyone figured there was nothing there to argue about anyway. Well, it's time for Danny to step up to the plate.

 

[lone wolf]

Book 'em Danno...

 

[mt_pockets1000]

So Williams takes this to the people of Canada and once again the country sides with Quebec. Watch how much personal emotions play in the final decision. Harper will do everything in his vindictive power to make sure Newfoundland and Labrador suffer on this one. Blows my freakin' mind.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Is there anyone living along this disputed border, or in this disputed area when
the headwaters to these rivers are? If there is, to whom do they pay their
provincial taxes to?

Lose it and take it to what next level? A constitutional Challenge? Ottawa says
that any territorial dispute is a matter for the provinces to resolve? If so how?

It's hard to believe that in this day and age of satellite mapping, that this border
isn't firmly established. I'm assuming (& I really know nothing about this) that the
border between Newfoundland & Quebec could be mapped, from space, and no
Surveyor team would even have to walk that land. What's the excuse for this not
happening already?

 

[lone wolf]

Part of it is latitude. A small part longitude. Watershed defines the rest. I wonder if there is any old documentation in England ... considering it was a Brit possession until 1949.

 

[mt_pockets1000]

The excuse is that Quebec realized the potential of this area before 1949 and had no intention of resolving the border issue at that time. They purposely left it off the table during negotiations and now we're seeing the results. Once again we are paying the price for sending a naive Joey Smallwood to negotiate our future. And the barracudas in Quebec and on parliament hill were only too happy to fleece him totally.

 

[Trex]

Labrador was originally part of New France and thus historically part of what has now become Quebec.
What is now Quebec technically never relinquished its possession of Labrador and its ownership was superseded by the conquest by the English crown.

Quote "After the the English conquest of Canada, Labrador was placed under the jurisdiction of Newfoundland. In 1774 it reverted to Canada, only to be returned in 1809. Shortly after the Conquest, English merchants and adventurers began to occupy the coast, and within a few decades were joined by French-Canadian and Jersey interests as well."

Thus Newfoundland was given "caretaker" status over Labrador several times by the Brit's.
Quebec does not recognize the loss of Labrador as part of it's defeat at the hands of the Brits.
Newfoundland bases its ownership on historical control and possession.
Quebec still has trouble accepting that.

As to the border between Labrador and Quebec: Lone Wolf is right.
Historically various watersheds and their direction of flow were agreed to define the area's of Quebec and Labrador.
At the time all concerned parties agreed to this system of division.
At the time it was an extremely common system.
Nothing has changed and it is obviously quite complicated to map numerous entire watershed's.
In fact they tend to change over time.
Thus there is no grand conspiracy, no complex plot.
Just a fairly involved process for mapmakers, cartographers and lawyers to slog through the geomantics of the region and then make there professional findings known.

Trex

 

[mt_pockets1000]

The 1927 Privy Council resolved this issue. Quebec must respect this law.

"... a line drawn due north from the eastern boundary of the bay or harbour of the Anse au Sablon as far as the fifty-second degree of north latitude, and from thence westward ... until it reaches the Romaine River, and then northward along the left or east bank of that river and its head waters to the source and from thence due northward to the crest of the watershed or height of land there, and from thence westward and northward along the crest of the watershed of the rivers flowing into the Atlantic Ocean until it reaches Cape Chidley."

 

[Ron in Regina]

The 1927 Privy Council resolved this issue. Quebec must respect this law.

"... a line drawn due north from the eastern boundary of the bay or harbour of the Anse au Sablon as far as the fifty-second degree of north latitude, and from thence westward ... until it reaches the Romaine River, and then northward along the left or east bank of that river and its head waters to the source and from thence due northward to the crest of the watershed or height of land there, and from thence westward and northward along the crest of the watershed of the rivers flowing into the Atlantic Ocean until it reaches Cape Chidley."

Maybe I'm directionally challenged today, but If you're facing Northward,
the left or east bank of any river are opposite sides of that river, aren't
they?

If you're facing Northward, Left = West, & Right = East, so when you're
arguing about ownership of a river....that would be a huge problem...8O

 

[Cannuck]

Lose it and take it to what next level? A constitutional Challenge? Ottawa says that any territorial dispute is a matter for the provinces to resolve? If so how?

If they can't come to a mutual agreement the feds can mediate. If that is not acceptable to either side or both, it will go before the courts. Personal emotions will only play in the final decision for those can't can't accept the decision of the courts

 

[Ron in Regina]

What about the directional thing above Cannuck? Is my Dyslexia doing
overtime today, or does the document describing the boundary as "and then
northward along the left or east bank of that river" really describing
two different sides of the same river?

 

[L Gilbert]

I claim PEI. I need a bigger spud garden.

 

[mt_pockets1000]

It should not have to reach the courts. The decision has already been made and Quebec must respect it. And the rest of Canada should show support for a ruling that is clearly in Newfoundland and Labrador's favor. Did we achieve anything on the Plains of Abraham? Never in my readings of history have I come across such a convoluted mess when it comes to one group conquering another in war and the loser coming out with so much power.

 

[Cannuck]

What about the directional thing above Cannuck?

Kweebeckers just have to be different I guess. Maybe when you are standing along the east bank facing north, the actual bank is to your left. Maybe the guy that wrote that fell into a pail of Newfie Screech.

 

[Cannuck]

The decision has already been made and Quebec must respect it.

If you are going to use that argument then we may as well do away with the courts. The whole reason we have the SCC is because some folks don't like the decisions that have been made.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Kweebeckers just have to be different I guess. Maybe when you are standing along the east bank facing north, the actual bank is to your left. Maybe the guy that wrote that fell into a pail of Newfie Screech.

When you are standing along the east bank facing north, the actual bank is still to
your right, right? When facing Northward, Left = West, & Right = East regardless of
which side of the river you're on.

 

[mt_pockets1000]

The river itself is not the problem here, neither are the banks. It's the headwaters, and they're clearly stated in this ruling.

 

[mt_pockets1000]

If you are going to use that argument then we may as well do away with the courts. The whole reason we have the SCC is because some folks don't like the decisions that have been made.

I gather you're referring to the Supreme Court of Canada and not the Security Council of Canada. Yes, our SCC, heavily loaded with Quebec judges, one judge representing the whole of eastern Canada. Why don't we just hand the rights over to Quebec right now and save the taxpayers a bundle.