Unity & Equalization??
- Thread starter Ron in Regina
- Start date
A good first step toward equality and "one law for all" would be to establish a single national language for Canada.
And both to mollify the Francophones and to prepare for the future, it should be Mandarin.
And both to mollify the Francophones and to prepare for the future, it should be Mandarin.
This is what decades of pushing multiculti instead of CANADIAN has done to us. Little better than the EU.At one time, Canadian conservatives prided themselves on championing a “10 equal provinces” view of the Canadian federation, in which this principle — found through a clear read of the constitution’s original text and intent — was upheld. Today, conservatives such as Moe have adopted a more mercenary stance in reaction to Ottawa’s newfound, all-party consensus in favor of legally differentiating Quebec: If the provinces are no longer understood as equals, then every province holds an equal right to be distinct from the others. A push for constitutional nationhood status for Saskatchewan — ideally passed unilaterally, as Quebec’s is set to be — could prove a good principled cause for a Canadian right that needs more of them.
Opinion | If Quebec can be a nation within Canada, why not Saskatchewan? — The Washington Post
Across a host of metrics, Saskatchewan seems to be the true base of Canadian conservatism these days.apple.news
Don't you just hate it when immigrants come barging in and insist on imposing their languages and their laws on the people who live here?
They didn't exactly come barging in, our clueless leader invited them. And all their baggage. And invited them to keep their languages and traditions. Except in Quebec.
It's because they are a have province so shouldn't need $13B. But Quebec negotiated with the Feds so that their hydro power income to the States isn't included in the calculations thus making them a "have not" province. They sell their excess power so they do get additional income not unlike Alberta does for oil & gas. But WE have to pay based on the O&G income - Quebec does not. THAT'S what Alberta is saying. We don't (for the most part) have an issue with sharing - it's how this sharing is calculated and is plainly not fair.Bloc Québécois leader scoffs at Alberta's equalization referendum, as Premier Kenney touts fight for fairness
The leader of the Bloc Québécois says he would propose a new equalization formula that would see provinces with higher greenhouse gas emissions pay more if the federal program were to be renegotiated.
Bloc Québécois leader scoffs at Alberta's equalization referendum, as Premier Kenney touts fight for fairness — Edmonton Journal
The leader of the Bloc Québécois says he would propose a new equalization formula that would see provinces with higher greenhouse gas emissions pay more if the federal program were to be renegotiated. When asked at a Wednesday news conference about Alberta’s equalization referendum...
When asked at a Wednesday news conference about Alberta’s equalization referendum, Yves-François Blanchet said if given the chance he would push for a “green equalization” model under which the province would have to contribute more than it currently does while jurisdictions with lower-than-average emissions would receive more money. I’d rather pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, etc…
The general perception of the recent referendum on equalization is that it was all about Alberta and its resentment over contributing more to the program than it receives in return. But what it was really about was Quebec. If not for the $13 billion in annual payments that are directed to Quebec out of a pot of $21 billion, would Alberta be as eager to demand a change?
Quebec represents about 22 per cent of Canada’s population but gets 61 per cent of the equalization pot. As is often pointed out, it is not the biggest recipient on a per capita basis — Manitoba and three Atlantic provinces are ahead of it. But if Quebec was prosperous enough to be eliminated from the program, and the remaining pool of $8 billion was distributed to the four remaining “have-not” provinces, would equalization get nearly as much attention as it does among people looking for something to beef about?
Quebecers can counter, quite justifiably, that their annual payment is calculated by a formula devised by Ottawa. It’s hardly their fault if the numbers add up in their favour.
Kelly McParland: Can Quebec be a 'confident' nation with $13 billion a year in equalization payments? — National Post
The fundamental basis of the two independence referenda was that the province didn’t need the rest of Canada in order to grow and prosper
That might succeed in tempering the argument, except for one thing: in the 64 years since the formal introduction of the current program, Canada’s only majority French-speaking province has managed to position itself as a have-not province that needs annual equalization payments to support programs equal to those in richer provinces, while simultaneously asserting it is a sophisticated, modern society deserving of the status of nationhood that is capable of going it alone if need be.
So how is it that a strong, confident “nation” of 8.5 million, which is presumably self-sufficient enough to seriously ponder separation, can also lay claim to $13 billion a year from the rest of the country on the basis that it’s a “have-not” province that’s unable to keep up to national standards?
Blah blah blah viva la something or another….more at both links.
Relevance? Did they steal Quebec? Is anyone alluding to stolen land except pgs with his/her question?
Anything about stolen land? This is Post#46. Seems to be about languages & laws…
Did the Protestants steal N Ireland? Did anyone steal N Ireland? Or Quebec?
Never in so many words , however after reading that individuals posts for eight long years a common theme is always there .