Jason Kenney promises referendum on equalization payments if feds continue to push ca

[B00Mer]

Um, because the separation would also create a physical separation between BC and the ROC. People traveling to or from BC would need to bring extra ID like passports just to travel through AB. Flights originating in BC or the ROC would have to advise the US govt of every passenger that boarded a flight if the flight path took it over AB, which would be a US state in your scenario.
In the case of Quebec separating, do you honestly think they were going to leave with their current borders intact? Do you really think the Fed would have permitted Quebec to cut off The Maritimes from the ROC? So why would you think they'd let it happen with BC?

In 1998 the CSC ruled on the idea of secession. Here's the short version. A province can secede from Canada if and only if its residents vote to do so AND the other provinces and territories agree to the secession. A province cannot unilaterally separate on its own.

They will just have to extend the Trans Canada to the NWT

As for cutting off the Maritimes I always go through the USA and re-enter at Bangor

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a province may secede from Federation union. The Canadian constitution allows for it.

https://www.cidob.org/en/content/download/57092/1472197/version/3/file/171_OPINIO_EUROPA_ANG.pdf


The Clarity Act spells out the process for a province to secede from Canada.

A referendum with a clear question. The ballot question must only refer to secession, and the Canadian Parliament must agree before the vote is held that it is a clear question.
A clear majority must vote for secession. This is not defined, but the Supreme Court has ruled that it must be more than just 50%+1. The vote itself must represent a clear majority of the province, and be sufficient enough to maintain popular support during the likely difficult negotiations that would follow; if only 51% of voters voted to secede, there is a good chance that during negotiations and discussions of new borders for the former province, assuming the provincial share of federal debt, etc., the number of supporters could easily drop below 50%. The Canadian government gets to determine what is a clear majority.
Following a referendum in which a clear majority of a province voted to secede, the Federal government, ALL of the provinces, and the First Nations would enter into negotiations. Any secession would necessarily involve amending the Constitution, which would require approval of at least 7 provinces totalling 50% or more of the national population, as well as approval by the Federal Parliament and Senate. Provincial borders would need to be redrawn to account for First Nations land remaining in Canada; if the country is divisible so is the province in question. As mentioned earlier, the negotiations would also include issues such as the national debt, use of the Canadian dollar and Bank of Canada, use of Canadian passports, among other issues. All parties involved would be required to negotiate in good faith.
After the clear majority vote in a referendum with a clear question referring only to secession, after the negotiations, and after the votes to amend the Constitution by the Parliament, Senate, and seven provinces representing at least 50% of the national population, and with the approval of the relevant First Nations, a province will have successfully seceded from Canada. Negotiations can now begin with the US. I will leave that process to an American to explain; I will just point out that while Alberta's oil might make it an attractive addition for the US, they already have territories like Puerto Rico that have been in line for statehood for quite a while. Adding a state would be at least as complicated as seceding.

 

[taxslave]

He'll save a whole 20 mins every 3 weeks.

Got a better reason?



How much per lite is your carbon tax?

Is the 3 cent difference thanks to carbon taxes on logistics?

We got a dipper and a fascist trying to destroy our economy. What better reason could there be,

 

[Cliffy]

 

[taxslave]

Um, because the separation would also create a physical separation between BC and the ROC. People traveling to or from BC would need to bring extra ID like passports just to travel through AB. Flights originating in BC or the ROC would have to advise the US govt of every passenger that boarded a flight if the flight path took it over AB, which would be a US state in your scenario.
In the case of Quebec separating, do you honestly think they were going to leave with their current borders intact? Do you really think the Fed would have permitted Quebec to cut off The Maritimes from the ROC? So why would you think they'd let it happen with BC?

In 1998 the CSC ruled on the idea of secession. Here's the short version. A province can secede from Canada if and only if its residents vote to do so AND the other provinces and territories agree to the secession. A province cannot unilaterally separate on its own.

I'm good with a separation as it would keep some of the Ontario riffraff out of BC.

 

[Jinentonix]

They will just have to extend the Trans Canada to the NWT

As for cutting off the Maritimes I always go through the USA and re-enter at Bangor

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a province may secede from Federation union. The Canadian constitution allows for it.

https://www.cidob.org/en/content/download/57092/1472197/version/3/file/171_OPINIO_EUROPA_ANG.pdf


The Clarity Act spells out the process for a province to secede from Canada.

A referendum with a clear question. The ballot question must only refer to secession, and the Canadian Parliament must agree before the vote is held that it is a clear question.
A clear majority must vote for secession. This is not defined, but the Supreme Court has ruled that it must be more than just 50%+1. The vote itself must represent a clear majority of the province, and be sufficient enough to maintain popular support during the likely difficult negotiations that would follow; if only 51% of voters voted to secede, there is a good chance that during negotiations and discussions of new borders for the former province, assuming the provincial share of federal debt, etc., the number of supporters could easily drop below 50%. The Canadian government gets to determine what is a clear majority.
Following a referendum in which a clear majority of a province voted to secede, the Federal government, ALL of the provinces, and the First Nations would enter into negotiations. Any secession would necessarily involve amending the Constitution, which would require approval of at least 7 provinces totalling 50% or more of the national population, as well as approval by the Federal Parliament and Senate. Provincial borders would need to be redrawn to account for First Nations land remaining in Canada; if the country is divisible so is the province in question. As mentioned earlier, the negotiations would also include issues such as the national debt, use of the Canadian dollar and Bank of Canada, use of Canadian passports, among other issues. All parties involved would be required to negotiate in good faith.
After the clear majority vote in a referendum with a clear question referring only to secession, after the negotiations, and after the votes to amend the Constitution by the Parliament, Senate, and seven provinces representing at least 50% of the national population, and with the approval of the relevant First Nations, a province will have successfully seceded from Canada. Negotiations can now begin with the US. I will leave that process to an American to explain; I will just point out that while Alberta's oil might make it an attractive addition for the US, they already have territories like Puerto Rico that have been in line for statehood for quite a while. Adding a state would be at least as complicated as seceding.

Read the last paragraph in my previous post. You'll note I posted the CSC ruling short version. Which is the basics of your big, long-winded post that actually backs-up exactly what I posted.

I'm good with a separation as it would keep some of the Ontario riffraff out of BC.

And it would keep a lot of the dirty hippies in BC out of the ROC as well. :lol:

 

[Hoid]

Why, do you not agree with democracy? If the majority of people in one region don’t want to belong to Canada, why can’t they peacefully depart.

because the majority of people don't want a pipeline that's democracy?

 

[captain morgan]

because the majority of people don't want a pipeline that's democracy?

They should have spoke out earlier before the pipeline was in place decades ago

 

[Jinentonix]

because the majority of people don't want a pipeline that's democracy?

Are you sure it's a majority? This is an old KGB trick where they attempt to get a majority of people to believe they are actually in the minority. It basically uses herd mentality to convince a larger group of people that they are actually in the minority.

A couple of years or so back I read an account of how this "trick" has been used on a smaller scale. Four people acting in concert have been able to change the opinion of the majority of people in a large hall by making it appear that they are actually in the minority.
The details are a little hazy as it's been a while since I read it but basically they show up separately and at different intervals. They make themselves comfortable by spacing themselves out in the group so that initially they are near the edge of all four sides. This gives the impression to the majority in the hall that what's being said by them isn't coming from the same person or group of people. At which point, they will exit in turn to "go to the bathroom" or "get something to drink" and come back and park themselves in different spots when possible. The process gets repeated until the crowd actually starts to believe there's a large majority among them who disagree with them.

This idea can also work on a larger scale in Canada due to our electoral system. For example, in Canada more than 60% of voters did NOT vote for the Liberals. (Yes I know, it was the same for the previous Conservative govt). Yet the numbers bear out a majority govt. This gets used as an influence for stupid people when majority govts (and their supporters) use words like "everyone", "nobody", and "majority". Weak minded people don't want to feel that they're "out of sync" with the herd so they'll go along with whatever they're told.
Which is really ironic considering so many of them are desperately seeking their individuality.

 

[B00Mer]

So you like Trump now?

Noted.

Did I say I like Trump..

You can be proud to be Canadian, doesn’t mean you like the leader. (Selfie boy)

Then again, wasn’t it Trudeau that told a vet in Edmonton that our Veterans are asking for to much?!!

Some veterans want more than Ottawa can afford, Trudeau tells town hall - Politics - CBC News

Tells this to a wheel chair bound Afghanistan vet.

 

[darkbeaver]

I agree.

 

[Cliffy]

And it would keep a lot of the dirty hippies in BC out of the ROC as well. :lol:

Most of our dirty hippies came from Queebec and Ontario, you bigot.

 

[B00Mer]

Most of our dirty hippies came from Queebec and Ontario, you bigot.

Which province did you come from Cliffy. :lol:

I was born and raised on ONterrible