Its all Greek to Quebec

[Edward Campbell]

Not sure of Mr. Campbell's feelings on equalization, but personally I'm not against equalization payments. It benefits Canada as a whole. Alberta might be paying them now, but that wasn't always the case, and receiving equalization payments from other provinces helped Alberta become the economic powerhouse it is now. In my experience, Albertans memory is very short when it comes to that.

Equalization payments are a part of a Federation of provinces working together, and really no different than having a welfare system, which is necessary and good. However, Quebec has no interest in "working together," only how much they can maraud the rest of Canada for their own gain.

I am ambivalent towards equalization ~ on it's face it is counter-productive: it keeps people in "have not" areas when there are jobs available elsewhere by, artificially, providing affordable social services. That being said, I do agree that some form of generosity is implicit in a federation and not everyone can or should be driven by tooth and claw capitalism.

I think the formula needs constant review, but I don't want to force a "race to the bottom," either - if "have not" province X can, for the same money per capita, innovate and produce better healthcare outcomes than "have" province Y then more power to them.

Unfortunately it is health care that drives provincial budgets and the equalization process ~ maybe there needs to be some sort of "claw back" from provinces that either: a) increase health care spending by more than x%, or increase healthcare spending by more than the BC, AB, SK and NL average, or c) spend more than n% of their provincial budget on health care.

 

[a_majoor]

The GoC seems to be trying to decouple healthcare from driving ever escalating equalization payments. They gave the provinces a 6% per year increse in block grants to 2017(?) followed by funding tied to GDP thereafter. It is up to the provinces to manage this money however they wish, with minimal input from the Federal Government.

The desired "ends" of equalization may be served better through changing the tax code and providing more money directly to low income Canadians (through tax credits, lower tax rates or rebates on GST or other means) rather than providing money to bureaucracies as is the case now. While I'm sure Quebec politicians would try to swoop down and seize tax refunds or vouchers from low income citizens, the optics would look very bad and this might provoke a huge backlash against such actions.

As Edward says, the key problem with the entire system is there is no sets of metrics to define how successful or effective "equalization" is, hence Quebec politicians can say (with a straight face) they are being cheated and not getting enough money without any real way of disputing them. Just look upthread if you disbelieve me.

 

[fraserdw]

"I am ambivalent towards equalization ~ on it's face it is counter-productive: it keeps people in "have not" areas when there are jobs available elsewhere by, artificially, providing affordable social services."

Roger that, here in NB it is seemingly to most un-productive and disruptive that stay, while so much talent leaves.  An end to some of the welfare transfers would turn NB in rural paradise if it convinced these goobers to leave. 

 

[Brad Sallows]

Quebec's income tax rates are incontrovertible evidence that Quebec has enough money to cover its needs without equalization.  All equalization does is allow Quebec to turn its safety net into a hammock at the expense of other Canadian taxpayers.

 

[a_majoor]

Simmering resentment even after all this time. Of course, a separate Quebec would probably disintegrate as portions separated from Quebec; and the entire idea has more pitfalls than positives for both sides in the short to medium run:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/paul-russell-its-time-for-quebec-independence-nat-post-readers-says/

Paul Russell: It’s time for Quebec independence, Nat Post readers say
Paul Russell  May 12, 2012 – 4:30 PM ET | Last Updated: May 12, 2012 6:00 PM ET

Jim Young / REUTERS
The Quebec flag blows in the wind in front of the Peace Tower.

Comments Email Twitter Canada would be a better place with one fewer province, a surprising number of National Post letter writers told us this week (even though the province in question is the largest by land mass, and is rather inconveniently located near the centre of the country).

These pro-separation verdicts came in response to two developments, the first being a letter in Tuesday’s edition from Czechoslovakian-born Helena Slampova. She suggested that Canada and Quebec start working on a “velvet divorce,” similar to what her home country went through 20 years ago. “Looking back, it was probably the best thing to have happened, and the relations between the two separated countries have never been better,” she explained.

Her letter sparked the question of the week on the Letters page: “Does Quebec have a future in Canada?” By 2 p.m. on Friday, close to 60 people had responded, with approximately 40 stating that Canada and Quebec should go their separate ways.

Monday’s Letters page will be devoted to running as many of these responses as possible. Here’s a taste of what’s to come.

“French-Canadians [in Quebec] will never be happy until they separate, so go right ahead,” wrote S.R. Watkins of Calgary. “Czechoslovakia separated years ago, and both sides now agree it was a good thing. Quebec’s future is to be an independent nation; the sooner, the better, for all of us.”

“Quebec has no interest in playing in the Canadian sandbox,” wrote Brian Purdy of Calgary.

“There is a growing resentment in Alberta toward sending what amounts to $14,000 per family, every year, to other Canadians, mainly Quebecers. Canada without Quebec will finally be able to be a nation with national ideals and goals. It will finally be one nation, not two. Whether velvet or not, Canada needs a divorce from Quebec. It is the absence of Quebec which would be the cement that binds this nation together.”

Other readers were nonchalant about Quebec’s future.

“The future of Quebec is becoming increasingly irrelevant,” wrote Norm McDougall of Thunder Bay, Ont. “Globalization, free trade and the effects of technology in homogenizing culture worldwide have changed the playing field. Irrespective of what happens to Quebec, Canada will remain strong, and Quebecers will assume both the benefits and obligations of being maîtres chez nous [masters of our own house]. If Quebec leaves Confederation, it won’t matter very much in the larger scheme of things.”

“Perhaps a better question would be to ask whether or not Quebecers know what their long term future is, and do they care,” added Jeff Spooner of Kinburn, Ont. “They flirt with every political party federally and provincially, and yet have no long-term allegiance to any. Many dream of going it alone, yet are propped up financially by the rest of Canada. Quebec, inevitably, will be shaped by the attitude of the rest of Canada.”

Perhaps not surprisingly, a significant number of the pro-separation letters came from Quebec residents.

“Canada can go it alone without Quebec,” wrote Alex Sotto of Montreal. “Without Quebec, Canada may not be one contiguous territory, but at least the English-speaking provinces will have a common language. And they are all signatories to the Constitution and pledge allegiance to the Queen of England. Quebec is the stumbling block to the unity of Canada; and once we get rid of it, the happier Canadians will be. It has been a bad marriage from the start and we may as well end it.”

Only about a dozen respondents wanted Quebec to stay in the federation, and many of those responses were less than enthusiastic.

“Does Quebec have a future in Canada? I sure hope so,” wrote Mark Sidloi of Côte Saint-Luc, Que. “It certainly would not have much of a future outside of Canada.”

“We have failed to solve the Quebec/Canada impasse, but I believe our grandchildren will be more creative,” added Lloyd Atkins. “Quebec can be a royal pain in the butt at times, but la belle province is an indispensable member of the Canadian family.”

–  Readers are always correcting our grammar and word usage, as shown by this note.
“A few days ago, I sent an e-mail to the letters editor, decrying an editorial’s use of the term ‘safe haven,’ ” wrote Ted Scott. “Since the word ‘haven’ refers to a safe place, the use of the descriptor “safe” is redundant. On Thursday, I found in another editorial that the Post had succumbed (twice in the same sentence!) to the colloquial habit of combining a singular noun with a plural pronoun: ‘the best way to get to know the enemy was to send one of your own to live among them [the singular enemy] and hope they [one of your own] came back, loyal and full of information.’ The job of a maniacal reader is never-ending.”

Posted in: Canada, Full Comment  Tags: Canada, entitlement, Quebec independence, separation, student strike

 

[Edward Campbell]

I don't know if Québec separation/independence is inevitable. I am about 99.99% certain that the process would be painful and expensive for Québec and Canada. I think I have said before:

1. Québec will not be required to take a "fair share," much less a full share of the national debt because the bond market will not allow it. An independent, sovereign Québec would be barely able to sustain its own, current, provincial debt - it would not be able to sell bonds to cover, say, 20% of Canada's national debt. The consequence is that Canada, sans Québec, has the same national debt ($583 Billion) as today but only 28 Million Canadians are on the hook for it, not 35 Million as now;

2. An independent, sovereign Québec will not look very much like la province de Québec today. The Ungava Peninsula will go - the UN will recognize it, but not Québec, as a colonized place that deserves, by the UN Charter, to be independent. The Pontiac and a few other regions of a newly indepenednt Québec will have large, aggressive separatist movements - some will succeed in leaving Québec and rejoining Canada; and

3. Québec's economy will have to shift from the so called Québec model to a less statist version in order to be allowed in to the NAFTA.

All in all both Canada and Québec will be measurably poorer places as a result of the separation exercise. It is wasteful and counter-productive. That doesn't mean it's not going to happen because neither Canadians nor Québecers are famous for putting reason ahead of passion.

But, Québec will not be Greece or even Portugal; it will be Belgium and Canada will be Australia.

It seems better, to me, to further decentralize Canada - which is already one of the most decentralized federations in the world (and I'll cite an authoritative refernce for that statement, if someone reminds me, when I get back home later this month): ALL provinces can and should be required to take over full responsibility (with tax points) for all of the areas assigned to provinces in the BNA Act - in other words 100 years of federal (mostly Liberal) intrusion into areas of provincial jurisdiction can and should be undone. The result will be a smaller, less visible, and less interesting federal government. Less intersting because it will have less and less wealth to redistribute. Canadians will depend,more and more, on their home provinces - some of which should form sub-national "unions" to lower costs of services resulting, perhaps, in a federaton of six de facto provinces: BC, AB, the prairie "union," ON, QC and the Atlantic "union."

My "new model" Canada will look more like the EU than the USA; provinces will be, pretty much, as "sovereign" as are Belgium, France, Germany and Spain - which share a common currency and trade and commerce policies and, increasingly similar foreign and defence policies.

 

[foresterab]

Don't forget the impact of the aboriginal groups in Quebec...all of which as far as I know have stated they want to be part of Canada not Quebec.  And if it's okay for Quebec to seperate from Canada then they will seperate from Quebec...especially as their presence of inhabitants pre-European is well recognized in law.

That basically means northern Quebec is gone...oh and also alot of the hydro power sites.  And alot of the south shore areas due to the influence of the 6 nations down there.  Tough for Quebec to maintain it's economy without resources and cash flow from elsewhere.

To be fair this is not just Quebec...northern, rural areas of Canada and it's resources affect most provincies budgets signifantly.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Don't forget the impact of the aboriginal groups in Quebec...all of which as far as I know have stated they want to be part of Canada not Quebec.  And if it's okay for Quebec to seperate from Canada then they will seperate from Quebec...especially as their presence of inhabitants pre-European is well recognized in law.

That basically means northern Quebec is gone...oh and also alot of the hydro power sites.  And alot of the south shore areas due to the influence of the 6 nations down there.  Tough for Quebec to maintain it's economy without resources and cash flow from elsewhere.

To be fair this is not just Quebec...northern, rural areas of Canada and it's resources affect most provincies budgets signifantly.

Don't forget the international implications. If Quebec separates what do you think the Americans would do?

Quebec separatists say hello to 82nd Airborne Division - 82nd AB say hello to separatists!

 

[Edward Campbell]

Don't forget the impact of the aboriginal groups in Quebec...all of which as far as I know have stated they want to be part of Canada not Quebec.  And if it's okay for Quebec to seperate from Canada then they will seperate from Quebec...especially as their presence of inhabitants pre-European is well recognized in law.

That basically means northern Quebec is gone...oh and also alot of the hydro power sites.  And alot of the south shore areas due to the influence of the 6 nations down there.  Tough for Quebec to maintain it's economy without resources and cash flow from elsewhere.

To be fair this is not just Quebec...northern, rural areas of Canada and it's resources affect most provincies budgets signifantly.

Which is what I said: "the Ungava Peninsula  will go" and there will be aggressibe separatist movements in  "a few other regions."

 

[Haletown]

Couple of points.

"Canada 's "have" provinces -- British Columbia , Alberta and Ontario -- are paying for Quebecers' early retirement, as theirs is the only province which has such a generous, early retirement benefit."

Ontario, thanks to the current Liberal regime, has driven the Ontario economy into a ditch or two and Ontario is now a Have Not province - actually #2 on the Transfer payment list, after Quebec.

Without the  huge amount of transfer money, Quebec wouldn't even be close to being able to afford the services they now provide - they can't do it now with the Transfers.

The very first Quebec Referendum was held in Northern Quebec, organized by an Inuk guy named Charlie Watt, now thanks to Trudeau, Senator for life.  The vote was about 99% to leave Quebec if Quebec left Canada. That vote would hold again today.


The Transfers do not include other large financial benefits that accrue to Quebec. For example, Quebec has about 50% of the Canadian Milk Quota, a very, very lucrative business model.  The irony is the Quebec Farmers Union, a group that supports independance, actually believe they would keep that quota if the became a separate nation.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The sad part is that the separatists, in QC and including the (many?) Canadians who want QC to leave, are almost all innumerate dreamers who are unwilling or unable to count up the costs. An independent, sovereign Quebec will be a poor place, not third world poor but not able to provide its people with anything like today's subsidized lifestyle. But Canada will also be poorer - not just culturally: "losing" Quebec will have real economic costs. Canada can and, probably, will recover in a generation or so ~ Quebec will require more time and considerable social and economic pain.

 

[DonaldMcL]

I also question how Quebec's aerospace and ship building industries would survive... its not like they could whine and moan to Canada then.

 

[dimsum]

I try to follow Canadian news as much as possible, but when did the Quebec situation change from protesting tuition fees to talking about separation?  Did I miss something in the past few weeks?

 

[dogger1936]

Does it really offer a counter point or just clarify how this takes place?  In the end Albertans are taxed and watch their tax dollars (along with the rest of Canadians) go to Ottawa who then passes subsidies to provinces like Quebec and the Maritimes.  Quebec has the potential and resources.  It should not be a "HAVE NOT" province, nor should Newfoundland, if we want to sidetrack.

Let's just stick with the "Thirty-year old child in Mommies and Daddies basement".    >

Hopefully Quebec can get some excellent fiscal managers and people with vision into their politic arena. Newfoundland benefits from Mr Danny Williams work even years after his retirement. While we spent quite a while as a "have not" province after joining Canada in 1949; our future is looking very bright. Quite a different place than the "rock" from my youth.

 

[larry Strong]

Hopefully Quebec can get some excellent fiscal managers and people with vision into their politic arena. Newfoundland benefits from Mr Danny Williams work even years after his retirement. While we spent quite a while as a "have not" province after joining Canada in 1949; our future is looking very bright. Quite a different place than the "rock" from my youth.

That would call for someone with the intestinal fortitude to do unpleasant things..........none visible on the horizon at this point in time..........

 

[Remius]

Don't forget the international implications. If Quebec separates what do you think the Americans would do?

Quebec separatists say hello to 82nd Airborne Division - 82nd AB say hello to separatists!

Riiighhhhht.....

 

[ettibebs]

Although I agree that Quebec pension plan should be the same as the rest of Canada, I have to say that the 7$ day care are not costing money at all to the Quebec government. It's actually making money out of it, it's just not politically sound to say it. Because of the high taxes we have the government is making more money from the women going back to work than it cost to run the program.

 

[Remius]

Frankly I don't see it happening. 

Seperatism is pretty much dead.  If the PQ get re-elected it won't be because of a referendum platform.  i t will be becasue of a rejection of the PLQ.

I think that people see the youth in the streets and think this is some kind of separatist thing again.  It isn’t.  Quebec’s youth today is just as militant as it ever was but they have a different cause.  Right now it is education but it goes deeper.  It is almost an extension of the occupy movement.  These kids are adopting a more socially conscious temperament.  The strike they are in is as much about perceived inequality as it is about tuition fees.  For the most part they aren’t interested in separatism.  Neither is the immigrant population that is growing in Quebec.  And the separatist movement has lost its message.  They do not have a charismatic leader type either and even if they did, he’d get eaten by his own as evidenced in the past.

Now in a “what if” scenario, Quebec were to separate it would likely be negotiated.  I think it would be naïve to think that Quebec wouldn’t keep its current borders.  Like anything it would be negotiated in exchange for certain things. 

Canada would require unfettered access to the St Lawrence Seaway as well as airspace rights for commercial flights over Quebec. 

Quebec would likely keep our currency but in doing so surrenders its economic control to a large extent. 

The borders would truly be seamless, similar to Europe. 

Quebec citizens would be able to keep their passports because unless we remove the dual citizen rule  and strip Quebecers of their citizenship we wouldn’t be able to stop that but the next generation of Quebecers born there would not benefit. 

Quebec wouldn’t really have a standing army.  It wouldn’t really need it.  Likely though they would have a small territorial defence force likely drawn from existing reserve units with training exchange agreements with Canada.  In fact many Quebecers would still serve in the CF.  Quebec would likely have it in their constitution that they would not have any expeditionary force.

Quebec would strengthen its economic ties to the states that border them.

Social programs in QC would take a hit and likely they would run deficit budgets for a very looong time.

As for the aboriginal populations, if Quebec was smart, it would emphasise that they are no better in Canada under the Indian Act and offer them the chance to form a northern territory similar to Nunavut with certain self governing powers.  An expansion of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

The English populations would not likely revolt.  It isn’t in their nature.  A more likely scenario would be an exodus of Anglo speaking Quebecers and some federalist French speaking populations.  This would hurt their economy the most.  As would an exodus of some established companies as well.

The Francophonie and its member states would be the first to recognize Quebec then the rest of the world for the most part would follow.  Remember that Canada would be negotiating this with Quebec so it would make this much more legitimate.

French populations outside Quebec would continue, they’ve managed without Quebec this long, albeit the official languages act would likely be scrapped.

I could go on, but in short Quebec will get more than what some Canadians would want to grant them but in the end they would become the poor relative in North America having far less than it does now.  It will try to get everyone’s attention but will largely be ignored by everyone in terms of any kind of influence it may think it has in North American geo political affairs.

 

[Loachman]

Quebecers pay the highest taxes in Canada.

Talk to your provincial government.

Elect one that exercises fiscal responsibility.

We pay income taxes to both Ottawa and Quebec.

Citizens of other provinces pay taxes to Ottawa and their own provinces. So what?

We pay the GST of 5%

So do the citizens of all other provinces. So what?

and a PST of 9.5%.

And some other provinces have higher PSTs.

Talk to your provincial government.

Elect one that exercises fiscal responsibility.

None of the oil used in Quebec comes from Alberta; it is all imported from overseas,

So is the oil used in many other provinces. So what?

The oil produced in Alberta and other oil-producing provinces is sold at world market prices. The base price is the same to all.

and is taxed by both Ottawa and Québec.

Citizens of other provinces pay taxes on fuel to Ottawa and their own provinces as well. So what?

IGas prices in Montreal last week reached about $1.44 per litre.

Talk to your provincial government about its fuel tax rate.

Elect one that exercises fiscal responsibility.

Users of the Québec Prescription Drug Plan pay premiums which are payable when they complete their Provencal income tax forms.

Citizens of other provinces pay premia for their drug plans, too - if they have one.

Many do not have one. Isn't it nice of them to help pay for yours, even if they do not have one of their own?

The Quebec daycare plan is paid for by another tax deducted from the pay checks of all Quebecers (QPIP).

And another tax deducted from the citizenry of some other provinces.

That article makes it sound like Quebecers are getting a free ride from the rest of Canada.

Yes, it does. Funny, that.

That is certainly not the case and I have the holes in my wallet to prove it.

Many citizens of other provinces have holes in their wallets that would indicate otherwise.

 

[The Bread Guy]

As for the aboriginal populations, if Quebec was smart, it would emphasise that they are no better in Canada under the Indian Act and offer them the chance to form a northern territory similar to Nunavut with certain self governing powers.  An expansion of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

From what little I know, a lot of Aboriginals and Aboriginal leaders see their relationship with "The Crown" going all the way back to the Queen.  Given that (and I don't know how the modern Treaties in northern QC work), I agree with those who've said they'd likely choose to stay with Canada/the Queen.