Taking Quebecois Separatism seriously
- Thread starter Truncador
- Start date
KKK in the 20th c. was a small, marginal group of skinheads/hatemongers who mostly fought brawls with other skinheads/haters, and here and there killed some people. By the time Trudeau declared martial law and smashed the FLQ, they had set off dozens of bomb attacks (killing several people), robbed banks with full-auto military weapons they stole from armouries, blown up the Montreal Stock exchange (intending, but failing, to kill as many people as McVeigh did), kidnapped State officials (and killed one), and claimed they represented the vanguard of a mass movement to overthrow the government- a claim that was more than a boast (you can still see pro-FLQ graffiti in Montreal).red said:
It's one thing to vote for separation; it's another thing entirely to actually separate.
Quebecers may do the former, but I doubt they'll do the later. Some sort of quasi-independent relationship would probably result rather than full-fledged independence. Why? Economics, pure and simple. Independence may make a lot of Quebecers feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but when they see an exodus of business (that is, what's left of it right now) leaving their "country", those feelings won't be so warm and fuzzy anymore. Same when they learn what the tax bill will be for the standards of living they've grown accustomed to.
But that's all moot b/c, IMHO, Quebec has and will continue to use the threat of separation as leverage to achieve their objectives. Nothing new there, every province uses their own "chips" to get what they want...
Quebecers may do the former, but I doubt they'll do the later. Some sort of quasi-independent relationship would probably result rather than full-fledged independence. Why? Economics, pure and simple. Independence may make a lot of Quebecers feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but when they see an exodus of business (that is, what's left of it right now) leaving their "country", those feelings won't be so warm and fuzzy anymore. Same when they learn what the tax bill will be for the standards of living they've grown accustomed to.
But that's all moot b/c, IMHO, Quebec has and will continue to use the threat of separation as leverage to achieve their objectives. Nothing new there, every province uses their own "chips" to get what they want...
They may vote to gain leverage but suppose they get more than 50%?
Even when they see the exodus of business after the referendum, it'll be too late to turn back.
Blame will be laid at the federal government for their corruption whether or not it is warranted.
I think it's just a matter of time now.
Even when they see the exodus of business after the referendum, it'll be too late to turn back.
Blame will be laid at the federal government for their corruption whether or not it is warranted.
I think it's just a matter of time now.
Just b/c a vote results in 50%+1 doesn't mean Quebec will separate. It just means the gov't has the "will of the people" to do so, should it so choose. It's not like Quebec will be sovereign the morning after.Svend said:
The end result would not be independence; it would be the greatest leverage possible to get the concessions that Quebec seeks.
Blah blah blah.
The French and the English here have pretty much been getting along or putting up with each other for 300 years.
I don't recall any big uprisings, civil rights abuses, racial killings, or mass killings, civil wars or anything else like we have seen to the south on numerous occasions.
Having spent a great deal of time in Quebec over the years, I can atest to the fact that most Quebecers I have met are a pretty good lot. I don't see what they have to possibly be upset about. French is alive and well, the country is bilingual, nobody is taking away anyone's rights.
This fallout from ad-scam is hardly grounds for separation. It's a political corruption thing involving about 120 million bucks. And Quebec based no less.
2 years ago, separation was all but dead with young Quebecers more and more wanting to be part of the greater whole than of just Quebec.
The one thing Chretien did do was pass the clarity act which makes the question of separation a lot more clear this time round than that foggy bullshit question that the PQ'ists try to fool people with last time.
The French and the English here have pretty much been getting along or putting up with each other for 300 years.
I don't recall any big uprisings, civil rights abuses, racial killings, or mass killings, civil wars or anything else like we have seen to the south on numerous occasions.
Having spent a great deal of time in Quebec over the years, I can atest to the fact that most Quebecers I have met are a pretty good lot. I don't see what they have to possibly be upset about. French is alive and well, the country is bilingual, nobody is taking away anyone's rights.
This fallout from ad-scam is hardly grounds for separation. It's a political corruption thing involving about 120 million bucks. And Quebec based no less.
2 years ago, separation was all but dead with young Quebecers more and more wanting to be part of the greater whole than of just Quebec.
The one thing Chretien did do was pass the clarity act which makes the question of separation a lot more clear this time round than that foggy bullshit question that the PQ'ists try to fool people with last time.
Unilateral separation
Landry's Plan B: Unilateral secession
Audet dismisses projected financial benefits of independence as 'Alice in Wonderland'
KEVIN DOUGHERTY
The Gazette
Friday, May 06, 2005
CREDIT: JACQUES BOISSINOT, CP
Flanked by finance critic Francois Legault, Parti Quebecois leader Bernard Landry responds to questions after his party unveiled a theoretical financial plan under a sovereign Quebec.
Quebec could declare independence unilaterally and withhold its federal taxes from Ottawa if negotiations with Canada drag on after a vote for secession, Parti Quebecois leader Bernard Landry said yesterday.
"Yes," Landry told reporters, when asked if he would go that far. "That is a plausible scenario."
Landry revealed his Plan B after PQ finance critic Francois Legault presented projections that Quebec would be better off without Canada.
"There is no question that money would be an obstacle to independence," Landry said.
Before Quebec's 1995 sovereignty referendum, then premier Jacques Parizeau characterized as a "lobster trap" the process set in motion by a Yes vote, suggesting that Quebecers could never turn back once a Yes vote had been cast.
But Parizeau denied columnist Michel Vastel's 1997 affirmation that he planned a unilateral declaration of independence within 10 days of a Yes vote.
In August 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that if Quebecers gave a clear answer to a clear referendum question, the rest of Canada would have to negotiate, adding that while the constitution does not recognize unilateral secession, it does not rule out "the possibility of a unilateral declaration of independence leading to de facto secession."
In his presentation yesterday, which he called a "very conservative" projection, Legault said by taking back its federal taxes, Quebec would get $31.6 billion more a year, even after losing $9.6 billion in federal transfers.
But a sovereign Quebec would also have new responsibilities, paying $8 billion a year in Old Age Security pensions, another $5 billion in Employment Insurance benefits, plus another $13 billion for its new jurisdictions, including $2 billion for defence.
Quebec generates about 21.2 per cent of Canada's wealth, but Legault assumes a sovereign Quebec would shoulder only 18.2 per cent of the national debt, or $6.4 billion a year in added interest charges.
And he estimates Quebec could save $900 million by ending duplication of services between Quebec and Ottawa, while putting all the federal civil servants in the province on Quebec's payroll.
This would leave a sovereign Quebec with a $1.3-billion surplus this year, rising to $2.4 billion in 2006-2007 and $5.3 billion in 2009-2010.
"A sovereign Quebec will be in better financial shape than the province of Quebec," Landry added.
^^[
]
Legault said that Finance Minister Michel Audet will have a $937-million deficit in 2006-2007 and total deficits of $3.3 billion for the years 2005-2010. But a sovereign Quebec would have $17.1 billion in surpluses for 2005-2010.
Audet said he "jumped" when he saw Legault's rosy projections of surpluses, noting that Legault did not take into account the transition costs of sovereignty, which economists estimate would add between 1 and 4 per cent to expenses.
"There is no reserve, nothing," Audet said, dismissing what he called Legault's "Alice in Wonderland" view.
The minister said while Quebec benefits financially from federalism, the fiscal imbalance deprives it of revenues needed for health care and other responsibilities.
"It isn't by separating Quebec from Canada that we are going to correct this situation," Audet said.
Legault said he was willing to debate Audet on his conclusions "anywhere, any time." Without agreeing to a formal debate, Audet said,"We will cross swords in the National Assembly."
Legault's study is an update of a 1991 report for the Belanger-Campeau Commission.
But a 2002 update of the same Belanger-Campeau study - ordered by Landry when he was premier - found that a sovereign Quebec would start out with a deficit because it would pay 21.3 per cent of the federal debt.
Interest on that higher debt would be $7.8 billion, eliminating Legault's projected 2005-2006 surplus.
Billions better off: forecast
By taking back its federal taxes in the event of separation, Quebec would get $31.6 billion more a year, even after losing $9.6 billion in federal transfers, said PQ finance critic Francois Legault. He called his projection "very conservative."
Landry's Plan B: Unilateral secession
Audet dismisses projected financial benefits of independence as 'Alice in Wonderland'
KEVIN DOUGHERTY
The Gazette
Friday, May 06, 2005
CREDIT: JACQUES BOISSINOT, CP
Flanked by finance critic Francois Legault, Parti Quebecois leader Bernard Landry responds to questions after his party unveiled a theoretical financial plan under a sovereign Quebec.
Quebec could declare independence unilaterally and withhold its federal taxes from Ottawa if negotiations with Canada drag on after a vote for secession, Parti Quebecois leader Bernard Landry said yesterday.
"Yes," Landry told reporters, when asked if he would go that far. "That is a plausible scenario."
Landry revealed his Plan B after PQ finance critic Francois Legault presented projections that Quebec would be better off without Canada.
"There is no question that money would be an obstacle to independence," Landry said.
Before Quebec's 1995 sovereignty referendum, then premier Jacques Parizeau characterized as a "lobster trap" the process set in motion by a Yes vote, suggesting that Quebecers could never turn back once a Yes vote had been cast.
But Parizeau denied columnist Michel Vastel's 1997 affirmation that he planned a unilateral declaration of independence within 10 days of a Yes vote.
In August 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that if Quebecers gave a clear answer to a clear referendum question, the rest of Canada would have to negotiate, adding that while the constitution does not recognize unilateral secession, it does not rule out "the possibility of a unilateral declaration of independence leading to de facto secession."
In his presentation yesterday, which he called a "very conservative" projection, Legault said by taking back its federal taxes, Quebec would get $31.6 billion more a year, even after losing $9.6 billion in federal transfers.
But a sovereign Quebec would also have new responsibilities, paying $8 billion a year in Old Age Security pensions, another $5 billion in Employment Insurance benefits, plus another $13 billion for its new jurisdictions, including $2 billion for defence.
Quebec generates about 21.2 per cent of Canada's wealth, but Legault assumes a sovereign Quebec would shoulder only 18.2 per cent of the national debt, or $6.4 billion a year in added interest charges.
And he estimates Quebec could save $900 million by ending duplication of services between Quebec and Ottawa, while putting all the federal civil servants in the province on Quebec's payroll.
This would leave a sovereign Quebec with a $1.3-billion surplus this year, rising to $2.4 billion in 2006-2007 and $5.3 billion in 2009-2010.
"A sovereign Quebec will be in better financial shape than the province of Quebec," Landry added.
^^[
] Legault said that Finance Minister Michel Audet will have a $937-million deficit in 2006-2007 and total deficits of $3.3 billion for the years 2005-2010. But a sovereign Quebec would have $17.1 billion in surpluses for 2005-2010.
Audet said he "jumped" when he saw Legault's rosy projections of surpluses, noting that Legault did not take into account the transition costs of sovereignty, which economists estimate would add between 1 and 4 per cent to expenses.
"There is no reserve, nothing," Audet said, dismissing what he called Legault's "Alice in Wonderland" view.
The minister said while Quebec benefits financially from federalism, the fiscal imbalance deprives it of revenues needed for health care and other responsibilities.
"It isn't by separating Quebec from Canada that we are going to correct this situation," Audet said.
Legault said he was willing to debate Audet on his conclusions "anywhere, any time." Without agreeing to a formal debate, Audet said,"We will cross swords in the National Assembly."
Legault's study is an update of a 1991 report for the Belanger-Campeau Commission.
But a 2002 update of the same Belanger-Campeau study - ordered by Landry when he was premier - found that a sovereign Quebec would start out with a deficit because it would pay 21.3 per cent of the federal debt.
Interest on that higher debt would be $7.8 billion, eliminating Legault's projected 2005-2006 surplus.
Billions better off: forecast
By taking back its federal taxes in the event of separation, Quebec would get $31.6 billion more a year, even after losing $9.6 billion in federal transfers, said PQ finance critic Francois Legault. He called his projection "very conservative."
Let them go.
And while we at the subject of seperation, we gladly take AB of your hands.
I hope that one goverment will have the guts to call the bluff. It is very obvious that this issue is being used to blackmail the rest of Canada.
And while we at the subject of seperation, we gladly take AB of your hands.
I hope that one goverment will have the guts to call the bluff. It is very obvious that this issue is being used to blackmail the rest of Canada.
My Canada includes Quebec. Always has, always will. It was never in doubt. I don't care about distinct language etc..thats local politics. But Quebec is in MY country.
What people in Quebec need to know is that the rest of Canada does not really care what language you speak. Although, it would make things a lot better if your road signs were in both languages like Ontario when it comes to major roadways. At some point safety has to be an issue?
If Quebec wants to be french..so be it. But make it equal. Raod signs etc. It not a bad thing to have a culturally diverse area in Canada. It should not however be a political weapon for politicinans driven by ambition or acadmeia wishing to be in history books.
These decisions affect people lives all over the country.
What people in Quebec need to know is that the rest of Canada does not really care what language you speak. Although, it would make things a lot better if your road signs were in both languages like Ontario when it comes to major roadways. At some point safety has to be an issue?
If Quebec wants to be french..so be it. But make it equal. Raod signs etc. It not a bad thing to have a culturally diverse area in Canada. It should not however be a political weapon for politicinans driven by ambition or acadmeia wishing to be in history books.
These decisions affect people lives all over the country.
That is the biggest piece of bullshit I have ever read.Truncador said:In his presentation yesterday, which he called a "very conservative" projection, Legault said by taking back its federal taxes, Quebec would get $31.6 billion more a year, even after losing $9.6 billion in federal transfers.
But a sovereign Quebec would also have new responsibilities, paying $8 billion a year in Old Age Security pensions, another $5 billion in Employment Insurance benefits, plus another $13 billion for its new jurisdictions, including $2 billion for defence.
Quebec generates about 21.2 per cent of Canada's wealth, but Legault assumes a sovereign Quebec would shoulder only 18.2 per cent of the national debt, or $6.4 billion a year in added interest charges.
And he estimates Quebec could save $900 million by ending duplication of services between Quebec and Ottawa, while putting all the federal civil servants in the province on Quebec's payroll.
This would leave a sovereign Quebec with a $1.3-billion surplus this year, rising to $2.4 billion in 2006-2007 and $5.3 billion in 2009-2010.
"A sovereign Quebec will be in better financial shape than the province of Quebec," Landry added.
^^[
Legault said that Finance Minister Michel Audet will have a $937-million deficit in 2006-2007 and total deficits of $3.3 billion for the years 2005-2010. But a sovereign Quebec would have $17.1 billion in surpluses for 2005-2010.
Audet said he "jumped" when he saw Legault's rosy projections of surpluses, noting that Legault did not take into account the transition costs of sovereignty, which economists estimate would add between 1 and 4 per cent to expenses.
"There is no reserve, nothing," Audet said, dismissing what he called Legault's "Alice in Wonderland" view.
The minister said while Quebec benefits financially from federalism, the fiscal imbalance deprives it of revenues needed for health care and other responsibilities.
"It isn't by separating Quebec from Canada that we are going to correct this situation," Audet said.
Legault said he was willing to debate Audet on his conclusions "anywhere, any time." Without agreeing to a formal debate, Audet said,"We will cross swords in the National Assembly."
Legault's study is an update of a 1991 report for the Belanger-Campeau Commission.
But a 2002 update of the same Belanger-Campeau study - ordered by Landry when he was premier - found that a sovereign Quebec would start out with a deficit because it would pay 21.3 per cent of the federal debt.
Interest on that higher debt would be $7.8 billion, eliminating Legault's projected 2005-2006 surplus.
Billions better off: forecast
By taking back its federal taxes in the event of separation, Quebec would get $31.6 billion more a year, even after losing $9.6 billion in federal transfers, said PQ finance critic Francois Legault. He called his projection "very conservative."
Talk about war is peace.
The fact of the matter is that Quebec of all provinces has a HUGE bureacracy and the rest of Canada pays for it.
The fact of the matter is that Quebec is the No. 1 receiver of "eqalization payments" (charity paid for by Ontario and Alberta). Funny how he never mentions that.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdngovernment/equalization.html
Quebec would be an econmic basket case if they separated. Period. The only ones who would benefit would be the snowball and Napolean types who can never be prime minister of Canada but could be of Quebec. Not only would the political instability destroy their economy, but the federal gravy train would get derailed.
Part of me thinks that there would be a civil war.
Having worked in Quebec a considerable bit I will atest to the fact that Quebecers do actually think that they are net payers to the Canadian system. It's listening to this kind of crap that has them believing it.
The Plan B or Clarity Act that was brought in after the last almost fatal referendum was initially the idea of people in the Reform Party.
It was generally supported by the Progressive Conservatives with the exception of their leader, Joe Clark.
Let's hope the next referendum will be clear with the question and consequences.
It was generally supported by the Progressive Conservatives with the exception of their leader, Joe Clark.
Let's hope the next referendum will be clear with the question and consequences.
The sheer stupidity of many French in Quebec is nothing but astonishing in many cases. Once upon a time, I was a student and worked for an English language hospital (this was the only reason I was allowed to be employed there). There was also a strong contingent of French separatists. On occasion, politics were discussed and one time I trapped a frenchy. Asked what would be the fate of the hospital after separation, he said "of course, we close it on day one". I then asked: "where will you work?". The moment of silence was priceless ...
james t kirk said:
Francophones in Ottawa have hijacked the Public Service Commission so that every position from supervisor up to Asst deputy minister, and even most clerical positions, are all "Bilingual Imperative" as opposed to Bilingual non-imperative (which means the gov't would hire you and teach you french). What this means is that francophones almost exclusively run the government. Anglophones need not apply. Of course there are a pittance of english-only positions, mostly outside Ottawa, but the power is in Ottawa, and there is no real anglo representation in the halls of power. Ask any anglophone in Ottawa who is looking for work and they will in almost every case tell you that they don't even try to apply to the feds any more.
Francophones justify this situation thus: because of the tremendous predominance of english in Canada they are all FORCED to be bilingual and if they have to do it, then so should everyone else.
I personally know many grads of Carleton U. and U. of Ottawa all desperately seeking good jobs with the feds, all highly qualified, working at starbucks while less qualified francophones from cegep or with undergrad degrees from U. de Montreal waltz into these prized positions. I understand the francophone argument in this but it just seems to me that anglo's can't even work for their own government.
Now if separation occurs, will all the franco bureaucrats get to keep their jobs and continue their favouritism in hiring practices? Actually, the ones I've asked about this actually say the government cannot let them go if Quebec separates while they are employed.
Francophones justify this situation thus: because of the tremendous predominance of english in Canada they are all FORCED to be bilingual and if they have to do it, then so should everyone else.
I personally know many grads of Carleton U. and U. of Ottawa all desperately seeking good jobs with the feds, all highly qualified, working at starbucks while less qualified francophones from cegep or with undergrad degrees from U. de Montreal waltz into these prized positions. I understand the francophone argument in this but it just seems to me that anglo's can't even work for their own government.
Now if separation occurs, will all the franco bureaucrats get to keep their jobs and continue their favouritism in hiring practices? Actually, the ones I've asked about this actually say the government cannot let them go if Quebec separates while they are employed.
Yeah, butBlue_M said:
If the job is bilingual imperative, that means that the francophone who gets the job has to speak English already.
If the Anglo can only speak English, then he's out of luck.
Just like if the franco can only speak french, he's out of luck.
I would assume if you had a john smith applying for the job who spoke english and french then he would get a job.
Quebec seperatism
I just hope that if Quebec is stupid enough to seperate from the greatest country in the world WE don't make it easy on them They shouldn't be allowed to keep any tax money, military assets, or anything that has a Canadian Maple Leaf stamped on it. Send them back to the fucking Dark Ages and then ask them how "proud" they are to be frenchies.
I just hope that if Quebec is stupid enough to seperate from the greatest country in the world WE don't make it easy on them
They shouldn't be allowed to keep any tax money, military assets, or anything that has a Canadian Maple Leaf stamped on it. Send them back to the fucking Dark Ages and then ask them how "proud" they are to be frenchies.I love Quebec.dj1470 said:I just hope that if Quebec is stupid enough to seperate from the greatest country in the world WE don't make it easy on them
And my Canada definitely includes Quebec.
But if they choose to separate.
Fuck them hard.
I am sure that there will be areas of quebec that want to remain part of Canada. Send in the Army and proclaim them part of Canada period. You would be looking at several areas - all along the Ottawa River, Montreal, the north, parts of Gaspe.
No more gov't money, here's your share of the debt.
No word of a lie, I was talking to a guy in our Montreal office just yesterday. He has NEVER been a separatist, and has even said so on several times. But yesterday he shocked me and said that lately he has had more separatist feelings then ever. His words were, "why not"
I was shocked.
He didn't believe me when I told him that Quebec was the biggest receiver of Federal Gov't Equalization Payments. I did't send him the link i posted previously because I didn't want to rub his nose in it and I know that he's just a little riled up right now.
I even said to him that this will pass and he agreed with me.
The thing about Quebec separatism though is it's always just simmering under the surface.
As a Quebec refugee (are not 25% of people in Ontario so classified), I left La Belle Province in 1976 via a job transfer. Three months later (and with my house unsold), the PQs came to power.
Nine months later, I sold my house - for the balance of the mortgage. It was personally a tough economic hit for me, but I was glad to be heading west down the 401 to the real land of opportunity.
In 1991, my retired father died in Montreal, while in the process of selling his house, and moving to Toronto. A WWII vet, his wish was to be buried in the Last Post section of the cemetary in Pointe Claire, the final resting site for so many of his comrades who fought with him to protect the UK and free Europe from Nazi tyranny, a war that so many Quebecers wanted to have no part of, even though the land of their ancestry was brutally occupied.
Who can forget the original Canadian terrorists, the FLQ, with their cowardly bombing of mailboxes, and their murderous deeds? Now Quebec celebrates these thugs and criminals as heroes and politicians.
From the days of the 1600's - remember learning about the French Catholic "Revenge of the Cradle" where the Church commanded their parishioners to have babies and bablies and babies so they would eventually be the majority to today, when the PQ will keep holding referendums until they finally win, many French in Quebec have become a racist faction who believe through isolation, they can survive in their native tongue exclusively. The only English they need to know is enough to read a menu in Florida.
When was the last time a Bombardier contract went to a province other than Quebec?
I like so many Canadians are weary of their politics. The province from a commercial standpoint is dead - how did some guy name "A Louer" end up with so much real estate in Quebec?
They thought they could kick Wal-Mart's butt and ended up with a broken ankle.
Pay the tab and let them go - the only question that remains is:
A what price will we let them back into Conferderation????
Nine months later, I sold my house - for the balance of the mortgage. It was personally a tough economic hit for me, but I was glad to be heading west down the 401 to the real land of opportunity.
In 1991, my retired father died in Montreal, while in the process of selling his house, and moving to Toronto. A WWII vet, his wish was to be buried in the Last Post section of the cemetary in Pointe Claire, the final resting site for so many of his comrades who fought with him to protect the UK and free Europe from Nazi tyranny, a war that so many Quebecers wanted to have no part of, even though the land of their ancestry was brutally occupied.
Who can forget the original Canadian terrorists, the FLQ, with their cowardly bombing of mailboxes, and their murderous deeds? Now Quebec celebrates these thugs and criminals as heroes and politicians.
From the days of the 1600's - remember learning about the French Catholic "Revenge of the Cradle" where the Church commanded their parishioners to have babies and bablies and babies so they would eventually be the majority to today, when the PQ will keep holding referendums until they finally win, many French in Quebec have become a racist faction who believe through isolation, they can survive in their native tongue exclusively. The only English they need to know is enough to read a menu in Florida.
When was the last time a Bombardier contract went to a province other than Quebec?
I like so many Canadians are weary of their politics. The province from a commercial standpoint is dead - how did some guy name "A Louer" end up with so much real estate in Quebec?
They thought they could kick Wal-Mart's butt and ended up with a broken ankle.
Pay the tab and let them go - the only question that remains is:
A what price will we let them back into Conferderation????
Bombardier are a family of federalists all the way.
But if Quebec ever did separate, then bbd.sv.b would be history. No more Canadian gov't money.
Separatism is good for no-one other than the PQ opportunists. I only hope Quebecers are smart enough to see that.
But if Quebec ever did separate, then bbd.sv.b would be history. No more Canadian gov't money.
Separatism is good for no-one other than the PQ opportunists. I only hope Quebecers are smart enough to see that.
