Québec Election: 7 Apr 14

[devil39]

Ya-a-a-a-w-w-w-nnnnn

Used to be quite emotional about this....but quite frankly no longer care. 

Albertan through and through born and raised.....have managed to live 17 years in Ontario though thanks to the RCMP and the Army.  Quite familiar with the issues but no longer concerned. 

I love Quebec and love most Quebecois....will probably still visit.  It will probably be like going from Cypriot pounds to Turkish Lira when I visit Quebec, fun and fun. 

Would be nice if my kids didn't need a C-B-C for a full career in the Army.  A shitty old E-B-B in any language might be good enough

 

[wannabe SF member]

Why is no one mentioning the possibility of seeing the maritime become exclaves? Why is no one mentioning the problems will arise when the overwhelmingly federalist natives reclaim their territory? Why is no one mentioning the disputes on who controls the seaway. And what about Montreal or the eastern townships of the anglo majority or the loss of 23% of the population?

Seriously, anyone who thinks that we'll be better off after this whole thing hasn't looked at the situation in full. We're looking at the demise of Canada full stop. We'll be cut off from our east coast, see a founding member leave the country and be left with a potentially unstable neighbor with demonstrable tendency towards ethnic nationalism with a sizable population of natives, anglos and other minorities.

Lets not get started with the blow to Canadian identity.


And you know what, this will all pale in comparison to what we'll have to deal with if Quebec passes the referundum on a bogus question or with a slim majority. Then what? Refusal to negotiate from the feds leading to a possible unilateral declaration of independance leading to ...

You get the idea.

I hope and pray that the referendum (and it is coming) fails or I think we're looking at the biggest  internal crisis this country will have ever faced.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Good post, Inky; the last thing we want is to break Canada apart. It is fine to be tired of QC's constant whinging; it is fine to not care; the fact that many (most?) Canadians don't care about QC simply mirrors the fact that many (most?) Quebecers don't care about Canada, either. We, many (most?) of us, have already separated the two nations, we really don't need to separate into two states.

As to a referendum: the first thing Mme Marois needs is "winning conditions." I'm not sure she's going to find them.

A PQ majority will, immediately, cause a loss of business confidence and an economic downturn ~ I'm not sure how big (or small) but I am sure it will happen. Quebecers will be willing to vote Oui! when times are good and they have confidence in their futures. When they are uncertain and worried about their own, individual, personal welfare they are most likely to vote "Non!"

It may, however, be useful to illuminate the problems that a newly independent Québec will face: a weak, failing economy; a large national debt; several separatist movements, amongst aboriginals (who have a much better legal claim for sovereignty than does Québec), in the Outaouais and the Pontiac region of West Quebec (just across the river from Ottawa and Petawawa respectively); in the Eastern Townships and, maybe, in parts of the Montréal and Montérégie regions, too. All these will cause many (a majority?) of Quebecers to reject sovereignty before[ a referendum can even be held.

 

[a_majoor]

The wheel spins yet again. Based on the past referenda, the area of Quebec covered by majority separatists (as measured by riding) encompasses most of the area defined by "New France" at the time of the conquest: i.e. pretty much a strip along the St Lawrence river. It isn't a continuous strip either, Montreal is not pro separatist (note are several other areas as described up-thread).

As a technicality, the huge expanse of northern Quebec (south of James Bay) which was the old "Rupert's Land" territory of the HBC was only handed to Quebec as an administrative convenience (and this is also one of the areas where the Native population is quite vocal about not separating from Canada). If the "District of Ungava" were to separate from Quebec, we would have essentially a northern land corridor linking Ontario to Labrador, and in due time could build road, rail, pipeline and hydro corridors to link Canada to the Atlantic.

Of course the St Lawrence Seaway is a joint project by Canada and the United States, even if *we* were unable or unwilling to stake our claim I'm pretty sure the United States will not let their claim lapse (and of course they can enforce their claim as well).

I'm pretty sure that outside of the desire of some Quebec ideologues to become bigger fish by making a smaller pond, the MO of the PQ is to attempt to blackmail Canada with more threats. As a lot of you note, most Canadians are past the point of caring, and it seems the PQ leadership hasn't read "The Big Shift" or come to terms with the fact that demographics and economics has shifted westward. The days when Montreal was the financial capital of Canada is long gone, and while the PQ may scramble to get something like that back, Toronto's position as the financial capital of Canada is under threat from places like Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver; the PQ is literally swimming against a huge tidal bore.

The fact that the demographic shift also means a majority government can be formed without a significant representation from Quebec must also stick in their craws, so the rhetoric is ramped up to "11" in an attempt to gain a voice since they no longer have a seat at the table.

Like most other people, I'm pretty willing to set the receiver to "ignore", but think some quiet preparations need to be made in case someone or something slips up. If there is a referendum and a UDI, the GoC should have some pretty clear conditions in place (like a non negotiable "every riding with a 60% yes supermajority is no longer part of Canada", and "the costs of evacuating Canadian citizens from ridings with a 60% supermajority will be taken from the current year's equalization payments, while the Government of Quebec bears the costs of moving people who wish into territory controlled by the new Government"). Other administrative actions like  a new census, voting rolls and quickly recalling and issuing new Canadian passports should also be in place. Do it quickly, like ripping off a bandage, and many long term problems will be prevented from festering.

edit to correct autocorrect....

 

[ModlrMike]

Oh, and I bet all those civil servants from Quebec who work in Ottawa would be happy to lose their jobs overnight.

I agree with Edward, the stakes for Quebec are being understated:

- dramatic rise in unemployment
- significant downturn in the economy
- exodus of business capital and operations
- civil unrest as FN agitate for their own separation

To name a few.


On another front, I wonder if this is going to come back to bite her:

FTQ wanted Pauline Marois to help stop corruption inquiry

 

[Remius]

Oh, and I bet all those civil servants from Quebec who work in Ottawa would be happy to lose their jobs overnight.

It wouldn't happen overnight.  But yes there would be a reduction in the PS over time.  But I doubt it would be based on what side of the border you are on, particularly in Ottawa.  Remember that there are many civil servants from Ottawa working in Gatineau as well.  In the aftermath of a referendum, they would all still be Canadian citizens with the same qualifications for the job they had prior to and the same rights as any other Canadian.  Things wouldn't just shut down based on the border. 

While it might make some of us feel good to think we'd play hardball, the reality is that we will be bound by laws and regulations just like before and we'll have to play by those rules.

 

[George Wallace]

......, the reality is that we will be bound by laws and regulations just like before and we'll have to play by those rules.

Funny how we already have laws and regulations and the province in question has been breaking them for over three decades.


But....I guess their form of ethnic cleansing is perfectly legal under our Charter of Human Rights and our Official Bilingualism Laws........

Really!

 

[ModlrMike]

I think the public perception of foreign nationals working for the federal government would be too much for Ottawa to ignore. I realize these folks would still legally be Canadian, but in politics appearance is everything. I also don't believe for one second that an independent Quebec wouldn't fire the first salvo.

 

[Remius]

Funny how we already have laws and regulations and the province in question has been breaking them for over three decades.


But....I guess their form of ethnic cleansing is perfectly legal under our Charter of Human Rights and our Official Bilingualism Laws........

Really!

Well we don't know that yet do we.  Their charter of values has yet to be tabled and has yet to be challenged, which I'm sure would be when it gets tabled and/or enacted.

 

 

[Remius]

I think the public perception of foreign nationals working for the federal government would be too much for Ottawa to ignore. I realize these folks would still legally be Canadian, but in politics appearance is everything. I also don't believe for one second that an independent Quebec wouldn't fire the first salvo.

That's the problem.  They are not (or will not be) foreign nationals.  Many current military and civilian workers are dual citizens.  This would be no different.  It's not a question of ignoring it is a question of having your hands tied.  You won't be getting their passports, you won't be stopping them from using our currency and you can't stop them from benefitting from all the rights afforded to all Canadians.

What will be an issue for them is their first generation Quebecers.  They will not be getting passports, they will not benefit from being Canadian.  This is literally going to take a generation.  It's not a next day thing.

More realistically is seing their economy collapse and many things coming to a standstill (but again, there would likely be a negociated transition).  Things like the fact that they would be on their own for border security, airports, rail, etc etc.  Dealing with their own (and likely way more volatile seperatists).  They wouln't be G20 or G8/7, entrance into treaties and agreements would have to be negociated (and likely long and drwn out).  Do you honestly believe the US will just accept them as part of NAFTA?  Doubtful because they want out of NAFTA with us lol.

Not sure what you mean by the first salvo?

 

[George Wallace]

Well we don't know that yet do we.  Their charter of values has yet to be tabled and has yet to be challenged, which I'm sure would be when it gets tabled and/or enacted.

What do you mean  "we don't know that yet"?  Of course we know that now.  Anglos are being discriminated by Quebec's Language Police for the use of English in signage and even on FaceBook.  If that is not harassment and against our Charter of Human Rights then what is it; not to mention the intent of our Bilingualism policies?  Thousands of Anglos are leaving Quebec annually due to this discrimination.  That is "ETHNIC CLEANSING" in a nonviolent, but still discriminatory manner.  Don't try to brush this off as anything else than what it really is.

As for Quebec being a "have not" province; what a crock.  Quebec is a "have not" province because they choose to be.  Quebec is sitting on vast mineral, oil and natural gas deposits.  If they separate and are cut off from all financial aid from the ROC, they will be forced to develop those resources and will be wealthier than all other provinces.  If you want to consider their share of the National Debt; like Germany after the Second World War, they can pay it off as they develop these natural resources. 

Navigation along the St Lawrence Seaway will be quite an interesting point, as they bring up more than Canada/Quebec negotiations, but will also involve the US.  The St Lawrence Seaway is a joint Canada/US endeavour, in it construction, maintenance and its administration.  It does not end at the Ontario Quebec border.  Will the US put up with its ports along the St Lawrence Seaway being blocked or obstructed in any way?

 

[ModlrMike]

That's the problem.  They are not (or will not be) foreign nationals.  Many current military and civilian workers are dual citizens.  This would be no different.  It's not a question of ignoring it is a question of having your hands tied.

Absolutely, that's why I said appearance. I know their legal standing will be as Canadians, but I doubt the ROC will care about such specifics.

Not sure what you mean by the first salvo?

Meaning "Quebec jobs for Quebecers. Fire the Canadians" as the first shot. It will not matter that these folks are legally entitled to work there, the perception will be they are foreign; made worse by their being Canadians. We've already seen how well Quebec welcomes out of province workers, how well do you think they'll tolerate foreigners?

 

[wannabe SF member]

I remain convinced that even in the best case scenario, both Canada and the hypothetical new republic would end up worse off.

I believe that a huge problem will be the new state's treatment of minorities. There's always been a strong xenophobic undercurrent in Quebec but it was kept in check by the Charter to some extent. As a first Gen immigrant, it is something I've had to deal with up to this very day. I have absolutely no faith in an independent Quebec's willingness to respect the rights of anglos, immigrants and natives. The former won't be a problem since we'll probably see a mass exodus (which will in itself be a massive loss for Quebec). I believe that the strong cohesion within native bands and their historical willingness to duke it out with the authorities leave me confident that they would be able to fight for their own rights.

It is when I think about my family left in Montreal, the disparate group of immigrants from different communities, often poorly educated and with little or no collective consciousness that I'm worried. I don't see how this can end well.

And in the end, all that doesn't matter to me as much as the most important point. I am not willing to see my home province break away from my country, full stop. In the end, people can talk self-determination all they want and discuss the finer points of international law. I believe that whatever happens, our leader should find their cojones and declare this country indivisible just as our southern neighbors once did.

The age of Nationalism is a bygone era and history has shown us that we'll be better off without it, why then should we still abide us by a political concept that is arguably responsible for provoking the devastation of Europe in the last century?

Forgive me if I seem a bit aggressive but this subject makes me very emotional.

 

[Remius]

What do you mean  "we don't know that yet"?  Of course we know that now.  Anglos are being discriminated by Quebec's Language Police for the use of English in signage and even on FaceBook.  If that is not harassment and against our Charter of Human Rights then what is it; not to mention the intent of our Bilingualism policies?  Thousands of Anglos are leaving Quebec annually due to this discrimination.  That is "ETHNIC CLEANSING" in a nonviolent, but still discriminatory manner.  Don't try to brush this off as anything else than what it really is.

As for Quebec being a "have not" province; what a crock.  Quebec is a "have not" province because they choose to be.  Quebec is sitting on vast mineral, oil and natural gas deposits.  If they separate and are cut off from all financial aid from the ROC, they will be forced to develop those resources and will be wealthier than all other provinces.  If you want to consider their share of the National Debt; like Germany after the Second World War, they can pay it off as they develop these natural resources. 

Navigation along the St Lawrence Seaway will be quite an interesting point, as they bring up more than Canada/Quebec negotiations, but will also involve the US.  The St Lawrence Seaway is a joint Canada/US endeavour, in it construction, maintenance and its administration.  It does not end at the Ontario Quebec border.  Will the US put up with its ports along the St Lawrence Seaway being blocked or obstructed in any way?

I mean exactly what I said.  The charter of values, which I thought you were referring to when you used the term ethnic cleansing (by the way you are completely minimising what ethnic cleansing truly is).  It hasn't stood up to any legal challenges yet because it hasn't been made into law yet. 

Thousands of Anglos, Allophones and Francophones leave Quebec for a variety of reasons.  Many are economic and some are as you indicated.  Work out west for example.  You would probably see some spikes anytime a PQ government is in power and even more so when a referendum rears it's ugly head.  Some stats are showing an increase in the anglo population in the early half of the 2000-2010 decade.  However that can be explained by immigration and a return of Anglophones who had moved out of the province after the last referendum.  Trust me when I say that I agree that Anglos in quebec are treated as second class citizens.  I'm not arguing that. 

My point is that we will, if we will, have to negiciate whether we like it or not.  We'll have conditions but rules will be in place.  Some stuff we won't like and some we will.  The rules while benefitting them will also likely benefit us.

But it isn't and won't include revokation of citizenship and magically banning them from using our money or throwing them out of their jobs. That stuff is not feasible. 

Not sure where the have not province thing came from but I'll answer by saying that Quebec's social policies is what is driving their economy into the ground or at least preventing growth.  They can't afford it.  Likely this will be exasperated in an independant Quebec even more so.  We'll likely have a Greece situation here where everyone works for the state, in some cardboard Utopia that will collapse on itself.  They can't afford to live the dream they think they will.   

 

[Remius]

Absolutely, that's why I said appearance. I know their legal standing will be as Canadians, but I doubt the ROC will care about such specifics.

Meaning "Quebec jobs for Quebecers. Fire the Canadians" as the first shot. It will not matter that these folks are legally entitled to work there, the perception will be they are foreign; made worse by their being Canadians. We've already seen how well Quebec welcomes out of province workers, how well do you think they'll tolerate foreigners?

Well an independant Quebec would have no authority to fire any federal public servant or military type.  The ROC might not care about their standing but the legality would trump it.  The rule of law isn't going to go out the window overnight.

In all likelyhood the referendum will fail so all this is moot.  But what you would see is an area like Gatineau wanting to stay Canadian.

If you wanted to avoid the issue, the Feds should declare an NCR district seperate from Ontario and Quebec.  Rewrite the Indian Act and recognise the territorial claims of some native bands and make it legally difficult to try and secede.  The Clarity Act and recognising Quebec as being Distinct were good pre-emptive steps.  Also changes in the rules for Citizenship were good too (your kids will not be Canadian if born out of country if you aren't living in Canada).   

 

[Remius]

This is a wikipedia article on Quebec partition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_Quebec

Yes it is wikipedia but it gives a good snapshot of the history and arguments for and against partitioning Quebec if it secedes from Canada.

My preference is the division based on localities.  Which ultimately would scare enough Quebecers to vote no.

 

[George Wallace]

I remain convinced that even in the best case scenario, both Canada and the hypothetical new republic would end up worse off.

I believe that a huge problem will be the new state's treatment of minorities. There's always been a strong xenophobic undercurrent in Quebec but it was kept in check by the Charter to some extent. As a first Gen immigrant, it is something I've had to deal with up to this very day. I have absolutely no faith in an independent Quebec's willingness to respect the rights of anglos, immigrants and natives. The former won't be a problem since we'll probably see a mass exodus (which will in itself be a massive loss for Quebec). I believe that the strong cohesion within native bands and their historical willingness to duke it out with the authorities leave me confident that they would be able to fight for their own rights.

It is when I think about my family left in Montreal, the disparate group of immigrants from different communities, often poorly educated and with little or no collective consciousness that I'm worried. I don't see how this can end well.

And in the end, all that doesn't matter to me as much as the most important point. I am not willing to see my home province break away from my country, full stop. In the end, people can talk self-determination all they want and discuss the finer points of international law. I believe that whatever happens, our leader should find their cojones and declare this country indivisible just as our southern neighbors once did.

The age of Nationalism is a bygone era and history has shown us that we'll be better off without it, why then should we still abide us by a political concept that is arguably responsible for provoking the devastation of Europe in the last century?

Forgive me if I seem a bit aggressive but this subject makes me very emotional.

No doubt, both would land up worse off .....Initially.  If you look around the world, it is very common that initially there will be some 'hard times', but then life moves on and stable, often prosperous, economies will take over. 

I look at this more along the lines of the Separatists, and more importantly their elected members, are stuck in a fantasy 17th Century mindset.  The world is evolving and times are changing faster every day.  Gone are the days that French is the language of Diplomacy, the language of Science, etc.  English, a compilation of several or dozens of languages is the world's language of Commerce, Diplomacy, Air Traffic Control, etc.  The French hatred for the introduction of "non-French" words into their speech and writing is fanatical.  The advent of the computer age and the creation of new words to describe it makes me wonder wtf is wrong with them.  Who cares that a computer mouse was called a "mouse", or that we have a "Windows Operating System", or that a computer is called a "computer", "Bits" and "Bites", "Screen Shots", etc.?  Seriously, these are new words to describe new creations.  Why must there be a French translation for newly created words?  I wonder what the new French translation for Millie Cyrus' twerking will be?

Most of the francophone Quebecers, who are members of the military, that I have worked outside of the Province of Quebec are more 'worldly' than the proponents of separation.  They have seen their advantages in the world as a whole outweigh the attitudes perpetuated by many of the separatists.  I am sure that this was mainly due to their having the opportunities to live and work well removed from Quebec politics.  At the same time, I am sure that the majority of Quebecers are just as fed up with and apathetic towards these discussions as the ROC are.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>the reality is that we will be bound by laws and regulations just like before and we'll have to play by those rules.

Again, do not underestimate the speed at which old laws - including the rock-bottom fundamental ones - will be voided and new ones written after actual separation.

You doubt?  Ponder on the number of conflicts inflamed by perceived unjust imbalances.

>I remain convinced that even in the best case scenario, both Canada and the hypothetical new republic would end up worse off.

Objective evaluation won't be the determining factor.  Emotion will.  If the numbers show that a person's own situation and prospects will be better if he contributes to a lump annual tribute to Quebec to remain in Canada, my guess is that most people will choose not to pay tribute.

You doubt?  Ponder on divorce settlements for a while.

My best guess: the response will be the most uncompromising legal expression of f-off imaginable.  "Sovereignty association" is a laughable separatist self-delusion.

 

[Remius]

Again, do not underestimate the speed at which old laws - including the rock-bottom fundamental ones - will be voided and new ones written after actual separation.

You doubt?  Ponder on the number of conflicts inflamed by perceived unjust imbalances.

Objective evaluation won't be the determining factor.  Emotion will.  If the numbers show that a person's own situation and prospects will be better if he contributes to a lump annual tribute to Quebec to remain in Canada, my guess is that most people will choose not to pay tribute.

You doubt?  Ponder on divorce settlements for a while.

My best guess: the response will be the most uncompromising legal expression of f-off imaginable.  "Sovereignty association" is a laughable separatist self-delusion.

Brad, just because someone leaves the club doesn't mean that it stops functioning.  Legally, Canada will still be held to its obligations.  National ones and international ones.  Voiding our acts, and laws will only happen if we get drawn into a civil war.  That will not happen.  Likely we'll see a Velvet Divorce type of scenario (mind you the elements are somewhat different).  Canada will want to reassure Canadians and teh world that it is business as usual minus Quebec.  Otherwise, our dollar becomes Canadian tire money and our economy collapses with everyone not having faith in our country.  THAT is why Canada will do everything it can to maintain its laws, treaties, acts etc etc.

The problem with your second point is that we have to approach it objectively and would hope that the Leader to do it will not act on emotion.  Otherwise, hell will break loose.  This is why it has done be done in the framework of our laws and system and hold Quebec to that standard as well.  The delusion is thinking that Canada would be better off without Quebec.  Canada will not be.  All  they see is the transfer payment issue and even then many people don't understand how even that works to begin with.  No, there is way more to lose.  Divorce settlements are a bad example. 

Your best guess is likely to be wrong but it is a guess either way.  It won't be the biggest expression of eff off because we can't afford to do that because the implications of doing that are too great to let happen.  And whoever is in charge will hopefully see that and likely will be under pressure.

Negociations will happen whether we like it or not.  Laws will bind us to our obligations or we become irrelevant across the country and abroad.  I'm not sure why people think they wouldn't or shouldn't.  It's not a bad thing.  In fact it may actually benefit Canada more than it will benefit Quebec.

People need to get away from the currency issue or the citizenship thing.  Those things are non starters. At least for a generation after seperation.

What you should look at is economic policies, trade agreements and transfers, international agreements, investments and local secession (or rather local areas remaining in Canada).  Those realistically will be where Quebec will hurt the most if they seperate.

*Edit*  Citizenship can be redefined yes.  It was looked at after the last two referendums but no one had the will or desire to tackle that football since it would in all likelyhood mean the end of dual citizenship.  It would likely I think be tackled after a seperation but that is a risk that still needs to be communicated to all and would require some changes to the citizenship act.  I will partially withdraw the statement that it is a non starter in that regard.

 

[d_edwards]

This all makes me question whether the ability to hold dual citizenship is something that should be addressed.  And what negative or positive outcomes would result.  Would the sovereignty movement lose votes if any advantage of Canadian citizenship  be lost if they were successful?