Duceppe says it's up to NFLD whether it wants to leave Canada

[Praxius]

The thing is, if one truly believes in freedom and democracy, then people should be allowed to democratically choose to leave such a democracy/country, rather then be forced to remain in a position they don't want to be in..... that's how war and violence starts in the first place.

Take Afghanistan or Iraq as an example.... they were invaded, governments removed and replaced with so-called Democracies, while being told they're now free and can vote.... so long as they vote for democracy and live the lives dictated to them.

We may think it's best for them, but you're forcing a society not used to this way of life to suddenly turn 180 degrees and do something totally different that they never experienced..... forcing them to do as you say, but at the same time telling them they're free to choose.

Talk about a contradicting message being sent about Democracy.

So ok.... we gave them Democracy and a chance to experience it.... fine. But if they had enough of it and decide to revert back to their old ways of living, then don't they have the democratic freedom to choose this and say FU to us all and what we did?

If we believe in Democracy, yes.

Same applies here..... if a province is fed up with the country and feel they can do better on their own, then they should have the democratic freedom and right to decide for themselves and shouldn't have to worry about superficial obligations to other provinces and protecting their interests at their own expense.

Sucks but it's true.

 

[wulfie68]

The thing is, if one truly believes in freedom and democracy, then people should be allowed to democratically choose to leave such a democracy/country, rather then be forced to remain in a position they don't want to be in..... that's how war and violence starts in the first place.

Take Afghanistan or Iraq as an example.... they were invaded, governments removed and replaced with so-called Democracies, while being told they're now free and can vote.... so long as they vote for democracy and live the lives dictated to them.

We may think it's best for them, but you're forcing a society not used to this way of life to suddenly turn 180 degrees and do something totally different that they never experienced..... forcing them to do as you say, but at the same time telling them they're free to choose.

Talk about a contradicting message being sent about Democracy.

So ok.... we gave them Democracy and a chance to experience it.... fine. But if they had enough of it and decide to revert back to their old ways of living, then don't they have the democratic freedom to choose this and say FU to us all and what we did?

If we believe in Democracy, yes.

Same applies here..... if a province is fed up with the country and feel they can do better on their own, then they should have the democratic freedom and right to decide for themselves and shouldn't have to worry about superficial obligations to other provinces and protecting their interests at their own expense.

Sucks but it's true.

You make a certain amount of sense but what the BQ and PQ advocate isn't true seperation, but seperation-lite, with their nonsense about sovereignty association... which Canada is under no obligation to grant. If Quebec truly wants to be seperate, and most of the population agrees, then it would be wrong for the rest of Canada to hold it against the will of the populace. That would also have to entail a lot of things Quebecers don't want to see:

- Quebec would not retain the right to use Canadian currency
- Quebecers would not retain the right to travel under Canadian passports
- trade agreements such as NAFTA and CAFTA would not automatically include them but need to be negotiated; Quebec goods and services would be subject to tarriffs upon entering Canada; and most of the interprovincial trade agreements involving Quebec would become void due to Quebec's change of status
- they would be responsible for their own coast guard and armed forces (though some equipment may be transfered to their control as along as they assumed their portion of the national debt)
- they would be responsible for their own negotiations for aboriginal land claims (although I could see the native bands getting screwed on that with the hardline approach and bigotry shown to other groups by the PQ)

There would have to be a lot of negotiations to settle a whole boatload of other issues. In terms of Machjo's concerns about the aeronautical and hydro industries, I don't see that big of a deal. Bombardier (the biggest company involved) would face the reality of moving or losing all the subsidies and sweetheart deals with the Canadian gov't. Quebec's hydro also faces a problem in that they own the dams but a lot of their lines pass through other provinces (i.e. Labrador) and if needed, other dams and power plants can be built elsewhere. I really don't see Quebec with a lot of leverage in any of it. Really no province has a lot of leverage save their natural resources and perhaps right of access, but except for BC and access to the Pacific Ocean, everyone can be gotten around.

 

[Praxius]

You make a certain amount of sense but what the BQ and PQ advocate isn't true seperation, but seperation-lite, with their nonsense about sovereignty association... which Canada is under no obligation to grant. If Quebec truly wants to be seperate, and most of the population agrees, then it would be wrong for the rest of Canada to hold it against the will of the populace. That would also have to entail a lot of things Quebecers don't want to see:

- Quebec would not retain the right to use Canadian currency
- Quebecers would not retain the right to travel under Canadian passports
- trade agreements such as NAFTA and CAFTA would not automatically include them but need to be negotiated; Quebec goods and services would be subject to tarriffs upon entering Canada; and most of the interprovincial trade agreements involving Quebec would become void due to Quebec's change of status
- they would be responsible for their own coast guard and armed forces (though some equipment may be transfered to their control as along as they assumed their portion of the national debt)
- they would be responsible for their own negotiations for aboriginal land claims (although I could see the native bands getting screwed on that with the hardline approach and bigotry shown to other groups by the PQ)

There would have to be a lot of negotiations to settle a whole boatload of other issues. In terms of Machjo's concerns about the aeronautical and hydro industries, I don't see that big of a deal. Bombardier (the biggest company involved) would face the reality of moving or losing all the subsidies and sweetheart deals with the Canadian gov't. Quebec's hydro also faces a problem in that they own the dams but a lot of their lines pass through other provinces (i.e. Labrador) and if needed, other dams and power plants can be built elsewhere. I really don't see Quebec with a lot of leverage in any of it. Really no province has a lot of leverage save their natural resources and perhaps right of access, but except for BC and access to the Pacific Ocean, everyone can be gotten around.

Pretty much, there's also talk that they'd have to raise their taxes even more to cover what the federal taxes don't once they're gone, so everything would also be more expensive.

Any form of separation by any province wouldn't be an over night thing, that's for sure.... unless it was done through military action, ie: taking over territory, resources and equipment and claiming as you're own.

I imagine if one province does approve leaving Canada, that's when all the other provinces will begin to think of their own positions in the nation, which would probably open up a long negotiation and debate between all provinces to determine who gets what and how's it all going to work.

Of course during this whole process, civil unrest will most likely ensure for those who want to leave right away, and there will probably be clashes.

Either way, none of it will be pretty.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Sure, NL can separate. Go ahead. First, though, NL and Quebec will have to settle their border dispute. THen, NL will have to pay back all the money Canada has poured into it for fifty years, including all the federal money spent on the offshore oil developments.

Right after those issues are settled, Danny can go straight to wherever he wants to go.

Is that all? Surely you jest.

Each will have to take the share of national debt in proportion of their population. For Quebec, this will mean 1/4th share of national debt.

Native Indians in Northern Québec will hold their own, separate referendum. They may very well vote to stay in Canada. If that happens, Québec will be lucky to walk away with half its current territory. I don’t know if a similar situation exists in Newfoundland.

An independent Québec wants to keep Canadian currency and Canadian passport. I would have no problem with them keeping Canadian dollar (provided they have no say in regulating its value), but I would be opposed to them continuing with Canadian passport.

Then what about the fact that Canada will be split into two pieces? Canada will demand a right of way, a passage linking the two parts of Canada, before it will agree to any independence.

In short, independence will be a very messy, very dirty and very lengthy process. It will be nowhere near as clear cut and Quick as Duceppe evidently thinks.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

There's a problem with the logic there. NL would have to pay Canada back before it can separate. Since it would be a part of Canada until separation, then certainly it would get part of that money back. Remember, NL paid its taxes into it too.

I'd rather unity over separation. But if we must separate, then I'd hope it be an amicable separation and not civil war as some would be itching for.

I would hope for an amicable separation as well, and hope that Canada will remain friends with the new neighbour. However, there are so many sticky, thorny issues to be settled, that I think the feelings are going to be strained for a long time after separation.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Not really. Sarcasm can be taken as an insult and some don't even know what sarcasm is and take everything litterally.

That indeed is a problem with sarcasm, I use sarcasm many times. But sometimes the recipient of sarcasm is too thick to understand that it is not meant seriously, but as sarcasm. Sarcasm loses its value if one has to explain it, what it means.

I am not bothered if somebody takes sarcasm as an insult, that is not my problem.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I think this separation thing with Newfoundland is purely driven by Danny Williams because he doesn’t get along with Harper and (who can blame him for that), Harper doesn’t like anything, and Newfoundlanders have bought into Danny's litany to separate, thus making it difficult for Harper.

Also, the Newfoundlanders probably still remember Harper's 'lazy Maritimers' comment, they have long memories in the Maritimes.

 

[TenPenny]

Also, the Newfoundlanders probably still remember Harper's 'lazy Maritimers' comment, they have long memories in the Maritimes.

Indeed they do, but Newfoundland is not part of the Maritimes.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Also, the Newfoundlanders probably still remember Harper's 'lazy Maritimers' comment, they have long memories in the Maritimes.

 

[TenPenny]

Is that all? Surely you jest.

Each will have to take the share of national debt in proportion of their population. For Quebec, this will mean 1/4th share of national debt.

Native Indians in Northern Québec will hold their own, separate referendum. They may very well vote to stay in Canada. If that happens, Québec will be lucky to walk away with half its current territory. I don’t know if a similar situation exists in Newfoundland.

An independent Québec wants to keep Canadian currency and Canadian passport. I would have no problem with them keeping Canadian dollar (provided they have no say in regulating its value), but I would be opposed to them continuing with Canadian passport.

Then what about the fact that Canada will be split into two pieces? Canada will demand a right of way, a passage linking the two parts of Canada, before it will agree to any independence.

In short, independence will be a very messy, very dirty and very lengthy process. It will be nowhere near as clear cut and Quick as Duceppe evidently thinks.

Are you saying that Newfoundland would have to shoulder 1/4 of Canada' debt if it left?
As for a right of way, we've got the Gulf of St Lawrence, but I'm not sure what part of Canada would be separated from any other by Newfoundland leaving.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So Johnny, let me get this straight. If Quebec wanted to negotiate amicable and peaceful separation, you'd willingly want to throw the lives of innocent men, women and children into the heat of war just to satisfy your own nationalistic blood lust? Sorry, but that's not any kind of patriotism I recognize.

I don’t see it ever coming to war. But there are so many messy issues to settle that any negotiations towards separation will be bitter and protracted.

The question of Northern Québec will be a particularly thorny one, if the Indians vote to remain in Canada. If Quebec refuses to recognize the referendum and claims that the entire province is going to separate, the Native Indians may very well ask Canada for protection. Then the idea of sending Canadian army to protect Northern Québec cannot be ruled out.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The thing is, if one truly believes in freedom and democracy, then people should be allowed to democratically choose to leave such a democracy/country, rather then be forced to remain in a position they don't want to be in..... that's how war and violence starts in the first place.

In principle that is true, I don’t believe in forcing people to stay against their will either. However, such separation is easy when there are two practically separate nations, which interact with each other minimally.

That is not the case with Quebec. Whether it likes it or not, Quebec is integrated into Canada to a considerable extent. Just to give one example, Bank of Montréal has its headquarters in Québec, but most of its business is conducted in rest of Canada. If Québec separates, it may very well decide to move its headquarters to Ottawa or to Toronto. There is also the question of Native Indians, who may or may not decide to follow the French population in separation.

So if Quebec people vote by a big majority on a clear, succinct question to separate, I for one wouldn’t want to keep them by force. However the resultant negotiations are going to be very messy. Québec will have to assume 1/4th national debt, and also cede large territories to Native Indians in the North if they decided to remain with Canada.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Indeed they do, but Newfoundland is not part of the Maritimes.

I thought the four eastern provinces are all referred to as Maritime provinces.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Are you saying that Newfoundland would have to shoulder 1/4 of Canada' debt if it left?
As for a right of way, we've got the Gulf of St Lawrence, but I'm not sure what part of Canada would be separated from any other by Newfoundland leaving.

I said Quebec, I did not say anything about Newfoundland. No doubt it will also have to take a proportional share of national debt.

 

[Praxius]

I thought the four eastern provinces are all referred to as Maritime provinces.

Naw, the Maritimes only consist of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI, Newfoundland & Labrador are their own thing.

Of course, we're all considered the "Atlantic Provinces" We're just not all called the Maritimes.

 

[TenPenny]

I said Quebec, I did not say anything about Newfoundland. No doubt it will also have to take a proportional share of national debt.

Oh, because my post referred to Newfoundland, not Quebec.
So I'm not sure why you said, "surely you jest', and then went off about Quebec, which had nothing to do with what I said.

Perhaps you were jesting.

 

[wulfie68]

I don’t see it ever coming to war. But there are so many messy issues to settle that any negotiations towards separation will be bitter and protracted.

The question of Northern Québec will be a particularly thorny one, if the Indians vote to remain in Canada. If Quebec refuses to recognize the referendum and claims that the entire province is going to separate, the Native Indians may very well ask Canada for protection. Then the idea of sending Canadian army to protect Northern Québec cannot be ruled out.

I saw some historians/political scientists talking about seperation and the aftermath around the time of Parizeau's referendum. One of them said a "civil war" type scenario or war between Quebec and the rest of Canada could be a possibility if Quebec carried on with the pattern of stomping all over non-francophone rights, as has become the norm there, ignoring Canadian diplomatic demands/actions and culminating in armed hostilities. The possibility of armed native uprisings for similar reasons was also raised, particularly given the history of antagonism between some of the Mohawk bands and QC.

This would all be a ways off but when I thought about it, why would it be so far fetched? Why would Canada feel kindly in any fashion to Quebec, after a split? Sure trade might keep some hostility under control but I imagine there would be a pretty wide spread anti-Quebec and anti-francophone sentiment if they did withdraw from confederation (we saw rises of it with both previous referendums).

I don't think a Newfoundland seperation would carry the same degree of animosity (although there would be some there still) although I think most of Canada would be sad to see the Newfs go.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Naw, the Maritimes only consist of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI, Newfoundland & Labrador are their own thing.

Of course, we're all considered the "Atlantic Provinces" We're just not all called the Maritimes.

I see. So I don't know if Harper's comment about 'lazy Maritimers' was meant to include Newfoundlanders or not.

 

[TenPenny]

Harper only said that because his grandfather had a nervous breakdown and jumped into the Petitcodiac.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I saw some historians/political scientists talking about seperation and the aftermath around the time of Parizeau's referendum. One of them said a "civil war" type scenario or war between Quebec and the rest of Canada could be a possibility if Quebec carried on with the pattern of stomping all over non-francophone rights, as has become the norm there, ignoring Canadian diplomatic demands/actions and culminating in armed hostilities. The possibility of armed native uprisings for similar reasons was also raised, particularly given the history of antagonism between some of the Mohawk bands and QC.

This would all be a ways off but when I thought about it, why would it be so far fetched? Why would Canada feel kindly in any fashion to Quebec, after a split? Sure trade might keep some hostility under control but I imagine there would be a pretty wide spread anti-Quebec and anti-francophone sentiment if they did withdraw from confederation (we saw rises of it with both previous referendums).

I don't think a Newfoundland seperation would carry the same degree of animosity (although there would be some there still) although I think most of Canada would be sad to see the Newfs go.

You are right, Newfoundland separating probably won't be regarded as a big deal. For one thing, the population is small. Also the province is way to one side of Canada, so Canada probably won't miss it. Also, up until 1949 we got along quite well without Newfoundland, there is no reason why we cannot do so again.

So you are right, Newfoundland separation is not in the same category as Quebec separation.