A new country in North America? What do Canadians and Americans make of this?

page: 9
23
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 06:09 AM
link   
A worst case scenario, from the point of view of Quebec, in the event of a successful vote to separate from Canada would see:

1. Serious social unrest in the North among aboriginals and in Montreal among non-Quebecois of a number of ethnicities and in the "Eastern Townships".

2. Abrogation of the existing energy agreement between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador.

3. Territorial claims by Canada and possibly by Great Britain, "Perfidious Albion", since Quebec in its present form is a creation of acts of the parliaments of the two nations.

4. Complete and utter lack of support from France, which would be told very diplomatically by the Americans, carrying a message from their largest trading partner, Ontario, and their safest, friendliest oil supplier, Alberta, to keep messing around in North Africa and to stay out of North American issues with the exception of St. Pierre and Miquelon.

5. Referencing number 3 above, possible immediate seizure of large areas of territory by the Canadian Army, inaugurating the long and bloody Quebec War (think Bosnia in the 1990's), which will reduce Quebec to a small "territory" along the St. Lawrence river.

6. A massive flight of capital out of the province. The last time there was a serious threat of separation Sun Life and The Bank of Montreal re-located to Toronto, thankyou very much.

7. Flight of skilled workers both francophone and anglophone from the province.

8. Misery, misery, misery.

But that is the worst case. I'm a francophile and would hate for anything remotely like that to happen. To coin a phrase, "Vivre Quebec Mariee".

(Apologies for no French accents. The computer with the French keyboard on it went boobs up.)




posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by KarmaComa
 


It's quite complicated. It's not really about "separation" per se, but more about having a "distinct society clause". At least that was what they wanted back in the 80's during what was called the "Meech Lake Accord". You have to go back to 1987 when Canada tried to bring Quebec more into the confederation. To add an addendum to the existing constitution act of 1897 to "Bring Quebec home" as it were. This was something that was left out of the constitution from the get-go and Canada made an attempt to ratify the agreement to include Quebec.

But it went horribly wrong.

Quebec would not sign the agreement unless these five conditions were met:

1. constitutional recognition of Quebec as a distinct society;
2. a Constitutional veto for Quebec over constitutional change;
3. a role for Quebec in the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court of Canada;
4. a constitutional guarantee of increased powers in the field of immigration; and,
5. a limitation of the federal spending power.

Long story short, Canada agreed to those terms except for two provinces that held out. Manitoba and Newfoundland. Major reasons being points 1 & 5

Distinct Society Clause.

The heart of the Meech Lake Accord, the distinct society clause was by far the most contentious feature of the constitutional agreement. On an ideological level, while Quebec has always viewed itself as one of two founding peoples, many English Canadians felt 'la belle province' should be treated as merely one of ten equal provinces. These individuals objected strongly to the idea of distinct or 'special' status for Quebec.


By giving Quebec it's own clause would invalidate the entire Canadian constitution. The constitution is there for ALL Canadians, but once you have a distinct society, none of it would apply to them or the supreme court of Canada would have to interpret the constitution differently based on just Quebec.

Federal Spending Power

The second most contentious area of the Meech Lake Accord was the proposal to limit the ability of the federal government to initiate new programs in areas falling exclusively under provincial jurisdiction. Under the Meech Lake Accord, a new section would have been added to section 106 of the Constitution Act, 1867, stating that provinces could opt out of national shared-cost programs in areas under provincial jurisdiction and still receive compensation, provided the province established its own program that was compatible with national objectives. Critics argued this constitutional change would limit the ability of the federal government to provide social programs of equal value to all Canadians. Newfoundland Premier Clyde Wells articulated the fears of many individuals in the poorer or 'have-not' provinces when he stated that, if enacted, this change would result in a "patchwork of services" across Canada. There were concerns the federal government would find it difficult to establish any new shared-cost programs in areas falling under provincial jurisdiction in the future, even if a need for these programs existed among certain segments of the population.


So there you have it. They don't want to separate, they want all the perks of being part of Canada but with their own rules, appoint 3 Supreme court judges while the rest of the provinces get only 1, keep our currency, military, bilingualism etc. At least that was what it was back in the 80's.

They've never committed to Canada as a nation and have been fighting with us from the beginning.They've gotten everything they've asked in the past. French as a second language across the nation was not good enough, they managed to make Newfoundland a "bilingual" province and tried to make Manitoba one too when the NDP was in power. That got nixed pretty quick. If the Quebecois wins tonight, then a new referendum will be brought to the table. This will be the third time now and if it passes, you can guarantee Canada will not make it easy for them to just pull out and eat their cake. It would be economic suicide for them and possibly harm Canada's economy in the short run.

Personally I would like to say good riddance. But in the larger picture of it, having a distinct society in the middle or our country would be a thorn in Canada's side for the rest of time.

Meech Lake Accord History Lesson

edit on 4-9-2012 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
In the case where Quebec votes to separate, I think the Canadian governemnt should fast track the aboriginal land claims treaties giving them full rights to self-determination over the traditional territories in Quebec that they have been asking for. From what I understand from some of those aboriginals is that they would not cooperate with the seperatists and would in turn vote to remain Canadian Territories. In essence this would reduce the Quebec territoies significantly.

The Study linked below offers an educated reply to my very abridged opinion. Take a look and see what it has to say.

1.16 (ii) Right to Self-Determination / Right to Independence



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by ExNihilo
 


Quebec is seeking to become an independent nation? Where are the sources for this? This seems a bit of a jump, considering all you have is speculation (from the looks of it).

...bah, I don't know nearly enough to be on this thread. -.-'''
edit on 1-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


uhhh....were you born yesterday ? obviously not..

This has been going on for decades....They have wanted to become their own country for a long time..

I'm totally cool with it. I actually think it would be nice to have a New country near us.

We could learn a lot from them as we are somewhat new ourselves. And seeing what they go through could remind us of times past when we were in their shoes.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
This will have a severe impact upon all these important things regarding Quebec and it's major role in the international community, both, political as well as geostrategical.

Unfortunately I can't think of any practical example right now, but I'm sure it's playing a major role in something !

Funny thing btw that French speaking folks apparently don't get along with no-one, no matter where, they always want to separate themselves. See West Switzerland or Belgium, same thing. So just let them become autonomous they are irrelevant so who cares.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by eagleeye2

I'm just curious about those spitting on Quebec un-hospitality.
How many of you guys actually can make yourself understand in french?
Or traveled in some part of the globe, where you can't be understood in english?
I'm pretty sure every of those positions towards quebec are solely based upon ignorance, the facility to pin point a different group while at the same time being unable to see we are all the same.


The fact is, BECAUSE of Quebec, many Canadians CAN make themselves understood in french. They forced laws to make many provinces BI-lingual, to accommodate THEM... All the while passing laws in Quebec to curb the use of 'excessive English language use'.

I respect many different cultures, and I attempt to use the language of the regions I'm in. Every other culture in the world I have visited has at least respected the fact that I TRY to use their language of choice.

EVERY time I've been to Quebec (I have been there on many occasions to visit friends who attend colleges and universities there), I am met with grief and hatred by these 'SO CALLED' Canadians, the very SECOND they realize that I'm not a 'francophone'. They are nothing like the rest of us, demand handouts from the government, demand the rest of us to bend to their wills... The list goes on and on...Most Canadians are simply sick of all of it.

For god's sake, look at their 'stop' signs... They don't even use the correct term for 'stop'...Where they have most of them proudly displaying 'Arrêt' (which is closer to 'bus stop') as opposed to 'Arrêtez', which to my knowledge is actually more of a proper term for one to 'stop'.

I'm quite frankly just freaking sick of it. Put em on an island, let the Natives have that land, and be done with it. I'd rather have the Native people's be given that land anyways. They are proud to be Canadian (at least the majority of them whom I have had the pleasure of meeting), and deserve that land more than the hateful, spiteful, begging french who live on that land now.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   


EVERY time I've been to Quebec (I have been there on many occasions to visit friends who attend colleges and universities there), I am met with grief and hatred by these 'SO CALLED' Canadians, the very SECOND they realize that I'm not a 'francophone'.
reply to post by jephers0n
 


You know. I've heard stories too naturally, we all have. When I went to Montreal for the first time it was a pleasurable experience. All francophones I met when realizing I couldn't speak french would quickly switch to English. Never a problem. But it wasn't until the very last day I got to experience Montreal style road rage at a crammed 4-way stop. Ottawa plates on my rental car. It could have easily turned into a fist fight if I were not on my way to work. Last day too...
edit on 4-9-2012 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-9-2012 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
French hypocracy: Yes, I'm going to go there...



Mar 8, 2012



BAYONNE, France — The Basque separatist group ETA urged France to open direct talks on a definitive end to its conflict with the French and Spanish states, in a statement released to AFP on Friday.

ETA announced an end to its armed struggle for an independent homeland on October 20 last year, but its calls for talks with Madrid and Paris have gone unanswered and security forces continue to round up its militants.

"Basque citizens hope that the French government responds positively to the opportunity to bring a definitive end to the consequences of the conflict, by beginning direct talks with ETA to that end," the statement said.

www.google.com...


Rail for seperatism all you want, malcontents, but the devil is always in the details, isn't it? It's been a while since Vive Le Quebec Libre spilled from the mouth of a French politician on Canadian soil, but the present leader is quite succint on Basque calls for an independent state:


Sarkozy visited the town of Bayonne in the French Basque country last week as part of his re-election campaign and was barracked by local protesters, including some from a Basque nationalist youth group.

During the visit he said he did not oppose the creation of an administrative structure for the French basque region, but said this must be done in agreement with elected officials, within the French republic and without violence.


Look to the motherland, seperatists, and see how that's going... nowhere.
edit on 4/9/12 by masqua because: Bolded and underlined pertinent point in external content



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by GreatOwl
 


Cha-ching!!!!!!!

You got it Pontaic!!!



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
5. Referencing number 3 above, possible immediate seizure of large areas of territory by the Canadian Army, inaugurating the long and bloody Quebec War (think Bosnia in the 1990's), which will reduce Quebec to a small "territory" along the St. Lawrence river.




This is exactly what will happen.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo they managed to make Newfoundland a "bilingual" province and tried to make Manitoba one too when the NDP was in power.


New Brunswick, where I am from, is the only official Bilingual province. North is French, South is English.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Other than Dieppe...

Damn Acadians


I kid, I'm Acadian from the Grand Falls / Madawaska Region.

I did voice my opinion on the other page, but another poster brought up a good point about federally owned assets that Quebec would no doubt love to keep if it seperated.

This would just not work out for them.

~Tenth



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Other than Dieppe...

Damn Acadians


I kid, I'm Acadian from the Grand Falls / Madawaska Region.

I did voice my opinion on the other page, but another poster brought up a good point about federally owned assets that Quebec would no doubt love to keep if it seperated.

This would just not work out for them.

~Tenth


It won't work out, but they'll threaten it again and again to get more handouts.

It's the way of the BQ.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ExNihilo
 


French separate Quebec from Canada, natives will separate Quebec from the French.

Quebec is not going to be self sufficient, it relies a lot of Canada as a whole. It would be good foothold for France to have in Canada.

French getting their own would make many others that make this great nation separate as well.

No Thanks from Me.

Edit: Oh and expect civil warfare as well from the neighbouring Provinces....
edit on 9/4/2012 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


I stand corrected



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN

Originally posted by ipsedixit
5. Referencing number 3 above, possible immediate seizure of large areas of territory by the Canadian Army, inaugurating the long and bloody Quebec War (think Bosnia in the 1990's), which will reduce Quebec to a small "territory" along the St. Lawrence river.




This is exactly what will happen.


I met someone back in the early 1990s who was in the Canadian Army who had been on exercises designed around the invasion of Quebec. The possibility of the kind of seizure of territory I mentioned is very serious and real.

Another sleeper in the list is the renegotiation of the energy agreement between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. The latter province believes quite rightly that it was stung badly in the original agreement and would certainly be looking for an opportunity to sting back.

If Quebec were to become a sovereign nation, it will be a very unique place. French Canadians are more Canadian than French as they themselves realize when they go to France. They are a people of the "New World", like their fellow Candians and like the Americans and Mexicans and the people of South America.

They are not Europeans.

In that sense they are "one of us". They are a people of the Americas. We are different from the people of old Europe, culturally,very different.

I'm learning to speak, read and write French. I have spent time in France and like French culture. I have nothing against the preservation of Quebecois culture in Quebec but I think that the best way to do that in the North American context is to remain within the Canadian federation.

The Quebecois are a great people, but they have never been "maitres chez nous", not under the French, not under the British. Only Canadians have given them the degree of autonomy they currently enjoy, but Canada is a big applecart and many Canadians are not ready to let one province overturn that applecart on a very dubious plan for cultural preservation. Many both outside and inside Quebec.

Quebec wants to fulfil a greater destiny than they have ever been able to manage on their own. They want to be the new Israel in North America. Do they also want the problems of Israel? Are they being realistic in the context of North America?

They want "oxygen". Here is the desire expressed by a great Quebecoise performer, Diane Dufresne, with the energy that many, not all people of Quebec feel at the thought.



What will happen if they get that oxygen is anybody's guess. When Rene Levesque took the Parti Quebec to victory for the first time, the first thing he did was party it up, get drunk and run over someone in the street, killing him. The whole thing was hushed up.

Many fear that is the sort of thing, and worse, that a vote for separation will bring to Quebec. Can their be too much oxygen? Can one get light headed? over assertive?

edit on 4-9-2012 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-9-2012 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower


Other than Dieppe...

Damn Acadians


I kid, I'm Acadian from the Grand Falls / Madawaska Region.


No kiddin? That's where the mother of my Child is from. Grand-Sault.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ExNihilo
 



The Quebec-American relation would surely have effects on the Canadian-American bilateral cooperation and commerce. Would Canada boycott Québec? Would this separation destroy Canada and fragment it in a bunch different states? Would the U.S.A take advantage of such a situation and buy-off Provinces to make them american states?

This separation would not destroy Canada, it would most surely destroy Quebec. I say let 'em separate but they take their share of the debt with them we take all the equipment the armed forces have in the province and give 'em no handouts to get started as a country. The day they separate we send the air force to bomb the political offices and send in the ground troops. We capture any and all Politicians who survived the air strikes and put them on trial for treason. Then, we give them NO political rights whatsoever.

I honestly don't even know why this is still an issue. Any politician who tries to break up the country is a traitor and should be treated as such. The French lost the war a long time ago, and with the loss any claim to a sovereign nation. They're just lucky we didn't send 'em all back to France.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Well, PQ just won the election. But they don't have a majority government. Any proposal for another referendum will get shut down by the liberals and CAQ
edit on 4-9-2012 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
23
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join