Quebecois Seccessionist Movement Dead?

D_Gunther Snotpole

Account Disabled
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
13,632
Media
0
Likes
73
Points
193
Well, I can't see us passing a law absolving us from paying debts owed to individual Quebec individuals and institutions. Perhaps we could, and perhaps we could make it stick. Don't know.

However, the national debt is no longer (I don't think) owed mostly to Canadians. So if such a law were passed, it might cost Quebecers something, but nothing like a quarter of the national debt or anything close to it.

That is essentially the point I'm making about the EI surplus as well. The federal debt is about ten times greater. If Quebecers are thinking money, they will be quite prepared to give up the EI surplus.

The other thing is, Does the EI surplus really exist? It's kind of a theoretical figure. There is no EI fund. Surplus money is simply put into general coffers. Overpayment can be calculated, but no fund as such exists. So what could be divided? (I'm not saying that arrangements wouldn't be made.)

You say if Canada can be divided, so can Quebec. That certainly sounds reasonable. But it's not nearly as practical. If Quebec were divided into something like cantons, you would have a pretty precise parallel. Some of the cantons could vote to leave Quebec, just as Quebec, one of the provinces, had decided to leave Canada. But there are no cantons ... just general areas where separatist sentiment is weaker than the overall sentiment.

Maybe the First Nations could vote to leave Quebec and make the decision stick. I don't know. Their psychological and spiritual link with land is obvious, but the legal status is more dubious.

It was Trudeau who first said, "If Canada is divisible, so is Quebec." But that hasn't been a show stopper.

Parizeau is considered a brilliant economist; he is a former finance minister, a prime architect of the Quiet Revolution (a driver, among other things, he himself, behind setting up the Caisse de depot), and former premier. He may disagree with you about the economic effects of partition, or may simply, because they conflict with his larger mission, choose to ignore them. I doubt that his understanding is dismissable. (I might add that Trudeau himself said that an independent Quebec could work, and he would remain living in Quebec in the unfortunate event that separation came to pass. "La separation ne sera pas un drame," he said.)

Is Parizeau a racist, as you say? When offering a program of ethnic nationalism, we can easily make him seem so. On that model, virtually all Israeli politicians would be racists. Are they, on a personal level?

A drunk? Well, hasn't been in years. However, in his salad days, he did seem to emulate John A. Macdonald, whose vision, as you know, became Canada.

I think, if we have a divorce, it will probably be more like the Czechoslovak Velvet Divorce.

But I don't want a divorce, any more than you do.
 

rob_just_rob

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Posts
5,857
Media
0
Likes
43
Points
183
Location
Nowhere near you
Well, I can't see us passing a law absolving us from paying debts owed to individual Quebec individuals and institutions. Perhaps we could, and perhaps we could make it stick. Don't know.

However, the national debt is no longer (I don't think) owed mostly to Canadians. So if such a law were passed, it might cost Quebecers something, but nothing like a quarter of the national debt or anything close to it.

That is essentially the point I'm making about the EI surplus as well. The federal debt is about ten times greater. If Quebecers are thinking money, they will be quite prepared to give up the EI surplus.

The other thing is, Does the EI surplus really exist? It's kind of a theoretical figure. There is no EI fund. Surplus money is simply put into general coffers. Overpayment can be calculated, but no fund as such exists. So what could be divided? (I'm not saying that arrangements wouldn't be made.)

You say if Canada can be divided, so can Quebec. That certainly sounds reasonable. But it's not nearly as practical. If Quebec were divided into something like cantons, you would have a pretty precise parallel. Some of the cantons could vote to leave Quebec, just as Quebec, one of the provinces, had decided to leave Canada. But there are no cantons ... just general areas where separatist sentiment is weaker than the overall sentiment.

Maybe the First Nations could vote to leave Quebec and make the decision stick. I don't know. Their psychological and spiritual link with land is obvious, but the legal status is more dubious.

It was Trudeau who first said, "If Canada is divisible, so is Quebec." But that hasn't been a show stopper.

Parizeau is considered a brilliant economist; he is a former finance minister, a prime architect of the Quiet Revolution (a driver, among other things, he himself, behind setting up the Caisse de depot), and former premier. He may disagree with you about the economic effects of partition, or may simply, because they conflict with his larger mission, choose to ignore them. I doubt that his understanding is dismissable. (I might add that Trudeau himself said that an independent Quebec could work, and he would remain living in Quebec in the unfortunate event that separation came to pass. "La separation ne sera pas un drame," he said.)

Is Parizeau a racist, as you say? When offering a program of ethnic nationalism, we can easily make him seem so. On that model, virtually all Israeli politicians would be racists. Are they, on a personal level?

I think, if we have a divorce, it will probably be more like the Czechoslovak Velvet Divorce.

But I don't want a divorce, any more than you do.

I'm actually undecided on the idea of a 'divorce'. Certainly there would be short-term economic problems stemming from it. Long term, I can see Canada being economically stronger without Quebec - the province hasn't paid its own way in decades. And Quebec's GDP per capita has been near the bottom of the list, among Canadian provinces and territories, for some time. I'm not sure how viable the province would be from a business standpoint - certainly they'd have to re-learn how to do a lot of things.

So far as Parizeau goes, I think he was ignoring economic reality where it interfered with his goal of an independent Quebec. I've worked in or around the wholesale banking/I-banking industry for years (1994-6, 2002-2007) and I haven't been impressed with the viability of many Quebec industries. Yes, they have the largest aerospace industry in Canada - but they have that because it's been heavily subsidized over the years. Pulp and paper has been an industry in decline for years, and will continue to decline, due to competition from Russia and China, among other places. Most of the financial industry fled Quebec after 1976, and secession would cause the remainder to move on as well. I'm sure they'd try to hang onto their hydroelectric assets, but as I have said, provincial borders can be redrawn as easily as national ones.

Interestingly, fewer and fewer Quebecers are choosing to pursue higher education, as a percentage, than the rest of the country. Where are they going to find technical expertise for their businesses?

It may well be that an independent Quebec would attempt to walk away from the debt. That's playing hardball, and responses in kind are certainly feasible. As a sovereign nation, Quebec wouldn't have much say with regard to laws passed by Canada to facilitate recovery of Quebec's share of the debt, by one means or another.
 

D_Gunther Snotpole

Account Disabled
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
13,632
Media
0
Likes
73
Points
193
It may well be that an independent Quebec would attempt to walk away from the debt. That's playing hardball, and responses in kind are certainly feasible. As a sovereign nation, Quebec wouldn't have much say with regard to laws passed by Canada to facilitate recovery of Quebec's share of the debt, by one means or another.

I think Quebeckers would be astonished at how difficult things would be, at least initially.
The Quebec government would have nothing to say about Canadian laws.
But Quebecois plainants in Canadian courts might.
The fact that the govt of Quebec walked away from a debt to the govt of Canada has no bearing on whether the govt of Canada should repay debt X owed to institution Y, no matter that that institution is, say, in Montreal.
I don't know what Canadian courts would say, but as you know, they are not terribly subservient to the government any more.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Long term, I can see Canada being economically stronger without Quebec - the province hasn't paid its own way in decades.

Some might say a similar thing about France in Europe. :eek:

I have some very close friends in France and love being there, but they do seem to think that they should be given more than they contribute for some reason.

Just quickly get a vote through Rob to get your earlier territory back. :smile: