Is Canada heading into Civil War?

[guyser]

And I think it should be made clear that it is not just the National Energy Policy that launched it.

I would not think you would believe this. So a myth launched it?

[Alta4ever]

I would not think you would believe this. So a myth launched it?

No "blanks" like you and your attitudes launched it.

[kimmy]

I would not think you would believe this. So a myth launched it?

hmm? What is the myth? That people have not forgotten the NEP? Or that there were grievances and slights that long predated it?

-k

[Wilber]

Civil war in a country that allows multiple votes on separation? I think not but this issue is the most divisive since Trudeau and the NEP. Many in the west see this as a Quebec coup. Dion from Quebec allying with Layton, born, raised and educated in Quebec, his father and grandfather prominent Quebec politicians, buying off a Quebec separatist party to gain power. Whether they succeed or not, this will bite both parties big time out west at the next election.

[Alberta_Blue]

hmm? What is the myth? That people have not forgotten the NEP? Or that there were grievances and slights that long predated it?

-k

the problem is that no one out east that is younger than 40 has any idea of how much of an impact that the NEP had on alberta and how much devestation it created for our province.

thankfully, the new generation of albertans, have many friends, family members, co-workers that have lived through this time, and are more than happy to tell us the stories and inform us of what happened and why.

we the new generation, are seeing the same policies, formatted and worded differently, being created by a similar french-led liberal party being created all over again, and with the new generation, as well as past, we would be more than happy to pack our Alberta bags and let the rest of Canada figure out their own mess derived from a few that have no idea how to run a country, country wide... not just within ontario and quebec's borders

[kimmy]

Whether they succeed or not, this will bite both parties big time out west at the next election.

Realistically, they can't get beat any worse out west than they just did. "You'll lose seats in the west!" is about as empty as a threat could be.

-k

[BC_chick]

That's not exactly what I was hoping to get across...

First, on Quebec "pandering"... us two had a discussion on this a while back. What I tried to express on that issue is the idea that what Quebec wants, and what Alberta wants, are not actually different or incompatible at all. It's just 2 things: respect, and the feeling of being "maitres chez nous" as the long-standing Quebec slogan puts it. The aspirations of both provinces are more compatible with Harper's decentralized view of confederation than with the traditional Liberal view of strong central government with big national everything.

I think autonomy and respect for provincial jurisdiction are ideas that people basically get. When Gilles Duceppe says "we don't want a national daycare plan, we have our own daycare plan that we're very proud of," this is what he's expressing. It's the reason why the phrase "opt out" started entering the Liberal lexicon after Chretien went the way of the dodo.

The other issue, "respect", is harder to pin down. Like wtf does that even mean? I am sure that if you ask any MP in Ottawa whether they respect any particular province, of course they will answer yes. So what is this? Just some touchy feely whiny crap? I will try to elaborate.

I think in the sphere of human relationships, one of the most destructive forces is the feeling that one is less important than another.

Whether it's the belief that your parents love your sibling more than they love you, or that your boyfriend still loves his ex more than he loves you, or that your co-worker is critical and you are expendable, or that your skin color or gender have deprived you of an opportunity that was available to someone else... probably much of the conflict in the world can be traced to someone's belief that they have been unfairly given lower status than others.

The Mulroney gang awarded the F18 maintenance contract to a Montreal firm even though a Winnipeg firm entered a superior bid. What message did that send? "Sorry, Quebec's interests come first." Sorry, Manitoba, but you're less important.

When the Chretien gang said that auto manufacturers would have carte-blanche exemption from Kyoto targets, what message did that send?

That's just a couple of examples, I think the point is straightforward. When politicians make it clear that some provinces have higher status in their eyes than others, it can't help but create resentment in the rest. That resentment, building up for years over a variety of issues, is what ultimately finished both the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives in Western Canada.

How can the Liberals change that perception? beats me. A leader who understands the extent to which the western provinces depend on resources and transportation would be a great start.

I don't think Dion's Green Shit platform helped, when it provided no credible explanation of how the economic damage from his anti-energy policies would be remedied in the west.

I don't think the new coalition, which will have almost no representatives between Kenora and Vancouver, is going to help either.

-k

When you mention things like giving Quebec contracts, it makes me think that Quebec is the issue. Or the East in any case. But obviously it's deeper than that.

Now you mention AB feeling unjustly criticised (the coworker example), I still am left to wonder.... what does the CPC do that makes Albertans feel their voices are being heard any more than the LPC?

Did transfer payments stop?

Did you finally get control of your natural resources? (maitre chez nous that you mention)

What is it that makes you (not personally, but Alberta in general) feel the CPC 'respects' you more? The fact that the PM's riding is in your province???

BTW, I'm not being confrontational, I'm really trying to understand why the province (and Westerners in general) feel CPC does things differently when history shows otherwise... and if it's really not about Quebec pandering, why is that all I hear then?

Edited December 3, 2008 by BC_chick

[Wilber]

Realistically, they can't get beat any worse out west than they just did. "You'll lose seats in the west!" is about as empty as a threat could be.

-k

They could be in BC. Between them the Liberals and NDP hold 1/3 of the seats here. It's also more than just about losing seats. I think western alienation has receded at great deal since the Trudeau years. This is undoing all of that.

[kimmy]

They could be in BC. Between them the Liberals and NDP hold 1/3 of the seats here. It's also more than just about losing seats. I think western alienation has receded at great deal since the Trudeau years. This is undoing all of that.

Yeah, there are 14 BC seats that the Liberals and NDP could lose, but 10 of those are in Vancouver... and Vancouver is just different. Down is up. Night is day. Hedy Fry is The Honorable Hedy Fry. This just isn't going to play the same in Vancouver as it does in the rest of the west.

Sure, westerners will be angrier that they've been in years, but it really doesn't matter. "Losing seats" is the only manifestation of that that is of any concern to the Liberals and NDP in Ottawa, and how concerned can they really be about losing what's left of their miniscule representation in the west?

-k

[guyser]

hmm? What is the myth? -k

The myth that the NEP screwed Alta without any context of what happened globally at the time.Altas want to blame the NEP, fine, but the prov govt signed the deal (since it would have been lucrative) but world forces killed any profits.

[Wilber]

Yeah, there are 14 BC seats that the Liberals and NDP could lose, but 10 of those are in Vancouver... and Vancouver is just different. Down is up. Night is day. Hedy Fry is The Honorable Hedy Fry. This just isn't going to play the same in Vancouver as it does in the rest of the west.

Sure, westerners will be angrier that they've been in years, but it really doesn't matter. "Losing seats" is the only manifestation of that that is of any concern to the Liberals and NDP in Ottawa, and how concerned can they really be about losing what's left of their miniscule representation in the west?

-k

Some of those ridings were quite close in the last election. In Vancouver South, Dosanjh only won by 20 votes. He will probably be one of the two failed NDP premiers to be Liberal Ministers in this coalition if it comes to pass. Burnaby Douglas and Vancouver Quadra were also fairly close and Martin only won by 68 votes in Esquimalt Juan de Fuca. But you are probably right. The irony is, if any provinces have grounds for separation on account of lack of representation federally, it would be the western ones.

Edited December 3, 2008 by Wilber

[Wild Bill]

The myth that the NEP screwed Alta without any context of what happened globally at the time.Altas want to blame the NEP, fine, but the prov govt signed the deal (since it would have been lucrative) but world forces killed any profits.

Hey, virtually every Albertan would disagree with you! If you think that by telling them it was a myth it will change their minds then you will be disappointed.

You give me a mental picture of Jimmy Swaggart standing in the middle of the Papal Square, Vatican City, during Easter Mass and yelling and yelling at the crowd of hundreds of thousands of worshippers - "Hey all you Catholics! You've got it all wrong!"

Edited December 3, 2008 by Wild Bill

[guyser]

the problem is that no one out east that is younger than 40 has any idea of how much of an impact that the NEP had on alberta and how much devestation it created for our province.

Because of the world price dropping , among other things, is what hurt the province.

No one blames John Crosbie a Cons, who increased the skim off the top.

No one wants to blame Lougheed, the Alta Premier.

Yup blame Liberals, even though there was a PC govt in that time.

thankfully, the new generation of albertans, have many friends, family members, co-workers that have lived through this time, and are more than happy to tell us the stories and inform us of what happened and why.

It seems a shame that they dont tell the truth. My own family relatives are guilty of this too.

, we would be more than happy to pack our Alberta bags and let the rest of Canada figure out their own mess derived from a few that have no idea how to run a country, country wide... not just within ontario and quebec's borders

And we will be all the poorer for it.

[guyser]

Hey, virtually every Albertan would disagree with you! If you think that by telling them it was a myth it will change their minds then you will be disappointed.

I and cannot argue that. I know it, but does that change if its true?

The truth as I know it is the deal would have greatly benefitted Alberta but for the drop in price in oil worldwide, and the lack of payments to Ottawa (in the deal) the whole time underwriting exploration costs....what can one expect?

Put this way, you and I agree to a deal, you (the Fed) pay my R&D costs out of royalties that are paid by me (province) for producing X .

If I cant get royalties to you because the market dried up, how long before you pull my R&D funding?

[Oleg Bach]

This point in history is the nearing of the END of the Canadian civil war. What is taking place right now is the last and defining battle. Canada is a remarkably civil place - the only place on earth that can wage a 30 year civil war without spilling a drop of real blood. I have done my tour of duty - as a citizen - I fought for justice for all...now it's your turn..to finish and search within yourselves what sort of Canada do you want - One that was based on the ancient Christian doctrine that protects the individual - or the cabalist secularist doctrine that ensures the well being of the common good at the expense of the individual - But remember the last doctrine enables a few to live like gods on earth and excludes the mass ( the common good) .....I say - "Is the empire of Rome worth the life of one good man?" - certainly not! When the rights of the individual are destroyed - the disease of grey cruel utilitarianism spreads like a disease and destroys the whole body of Rome in time...The real rights of the individual are at stake here - YOU ..............are important...don't let the left say that you are but an animal and the good of the herd comes first...they eat all in the herd eventually and spare none.

[Argus]

Kind of makes you wonder why us East Coast "bums and thieves" dont feel alienated by the West. Respect is given in return for respect.

Get a job.

[Argus]

Anyway, I've gone on at some length trying to explain the chip on the shoulder that's a prominent feature of Alberta politics (and the rest of the prairies to some degree.)

Yes, and done a good of it. Now I wonder if someone could explain the snotty, arrogant contempt and superiority so many in central Canada - mostly on the left - feel towards the West.

[guyser]

Yes, and done a good of it. Now I wonder if someone could explain the snotty, arrogant contempt and superiority so many in central Canada - mostly on the left - feel towards the West.

Is it there?

I lived in Alberta and BC , granted it was in the early 80's , but the sentiment then was more against the East. I do not recall arrogance et al when I lived in ,and grew up in Ontario, against the west.

When I lived in BC it was prevelant , enough for me to say I was born in the town down the road.

I can look back and recall the east ignoring the west in some ways, but not outright contempt nor superiority.

Most of what I read are whiners, misinformed people, and those that just feel like blaming someone else. And I will stress, both sides of this. East west lib con .

[kimmy]

When you mention things like giving Quebec contracts, it makes me think that Quebec is the issue. Or the East in any case. But obviously it's deeper than that.

I don't think anybody objects to contracts being awarded in Quebec if the bidding process is done fairly.

The F18 contract made people livid because it was such a shocking example of bias.

Now you mention AB feeling unjustly criticised (the coworker example), I still am left to wonder.... what does the CPC do that makes Albertans feel their voices are being heard any more than the LPC?

Well, I think the fact that the Harper government has not been outright hostile to the province, as Chretien was and Dion would have been, gives Albertans a feeling that they're more respected under his regime.

Did transfer payments stop?

I don't think most people object to transfer payments and equalization.

What people objected to, a lot, was the discretionary spending and special programs and subsidies and grants and initiatives in Quebec, that were really just blatant attempts to buy Quebecers' support for federalism. (Which, ironically, Quebecers didn't even want; they found it insulting for the most part.)

Did you finally get control of your natural resources? (maitre chez nous that you mention)

Have that; will continue to have that. Again, I have to mention Dion's anti-energy platform, and the

What is it that makes you (not personally, but Alberta in general) feel the CPC 'respects' you more? The fact that the PM's riding is in your province???

Mulroney was not from Alberta, but people loved him. Paul Martin was not from Alberta, but Albertans would have given him a chance... until he got left holding the bag all the stuff the Gomery inquiry brought out.

Dion? How is it possible to feel respected by someone who put in place a platform that's so fundamentally opposed to your interests?

But yes, having a Western PM for a change did undoubtedly help the region feel accepted. Prior to Harper, there was Kim Campbell's few months in power, and Joe Clark's few months in power, and before that, Diefenbaker, and that's all. I'm not sure that John Turner counts (or if he even matters.)

Chantal Hebert once wrote a column wondering whether it was even possible for an Albertan to become PM (in reference to the series of defeats suffered by Manning, Day, and Harper, and speculation that Harper would be ousted to make way for someone more palatable to central Canadian voters.) At the time it was a legitimate question. Harper's victories in 2006 and 2008 have at least provided an answer, and don't doubt that it means something to Albertans.

BTW, I'm not being confrontational, I'm really trying to understand why the province (and Westerners in general) feel CPC does things differently when history shows otherwise... and if it's really not about Quebec pandering, why is that all I hear then?

The "Quebec pandering" is just the most flagrant example of what I've been talking about. Higher status, and lower status.

-k

[Oleg Bach]

The west is still free and open and represents what was Canada. The contempt for the west by the centralist is not contempt - It is a longing envy of a past and better era..seeing they know they will never have that grand and free experence - the urbanites in Toronto seek to destroy what they wish not to understand. That urban living is inferiour to the still established rural purity that is the west...The ants in the ant hill wish to wander and adventure to the west -but are restrained from being natural by the bonds of anti-liberalism...funny how the liberals have converted the word liberty to the opposite. They just wish that they were you...just like my kids who envy the era that I grew up in. There was freedom...and now freedom with the increase in population is less.

[ThatGuy]

I live in Ontario and I am a huge Edmonton Oilers fan.

If anything I think that Westerners think "central" Canadians think about them too much.

[kimmy]

The myth that the NEP screwed Alta without any context of what happened globally at the time.Altas want to blame the NEP, fine, but the prov govt signed the deal (since it would have been lucrative) but world forces killed any profits.

Lucrative for who?

For the federal government, certainly, as they dramatically increased their share of revenue from oil at the expense of the province and the producer. And certainly for Central Canada industry. I don't think anybody thought it would be lucrative for the economy of Alberta.

Lougheed was so excited about the NEP that he threatened to "turn off the taps" and took the federal government to the Supreme Court over it. He grudgingly signed on after managing to gain a few concessions in regards to oil sands development.

And while the drastic drop in world oil prices hurt the industry, the sharp increase in the share of money that the federal government took for each barrel was about the last thing the industry needed at that time. (present day analogy: slap a $3000 dollar federal surcharge on each new car built in Canada. Just what an industry needs at a time like that.)

I have read that other oil-dependent economies at that time survived the price-plunge quite well; presumably in those countries the government opted not to pick that particular time to start gouging the industry with massive royalty increases.

-k

[wulf42]

Seabee, here's the Conservative MP's letter that your French article refers to.

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/2008/957.htm

The letter asks gun owners to oppose the coalition. I fail to see what this has to do with civil war.

How did you come to the conclusion that it is related to civil war?

Thanks for giving an english text.

I don't think this is an immediate appeal for civil war. But I'm a bit worried when "gun owners" are asked to gather for a cause, however inoffensive the cause be at first, because it could escalate in actually using guns. Or at least a few sympathisers might think so. And in a tense political climate, as what we are living now, one assassination attempt could be enough to trigger a civil war.

I don't see a civil war on the horizon now. But seeing how tense it is, one better thread carefully.

And I agree; it should be fought with pens.

This looks like a gun control issue.....if the Liberals get in handguns and semi auto's will become illegal right away............when i even mentioned the possibilty of a civil war i was jumped on.....lol. although its highly unlikely under the right circumstances it could happen hopefully it will be fought only by the pen!

[capricorn]

hopefully it will be fought only by the pen!

The mouth is also a handy weapon...."fighting words".

[Argus]

I don't think anybody objects to contracts being awarded in Quebec if the bidding process is done fairly.

The F18 contract made people livid because it was such a shocking example of bias.

The problem is that Canada's provinces are so fundamentally lopsided in population - and thus seats - and power. Alberta's 28 seats just can't come near the importance of Quebec's 75 - or Ontario's 108 for that matter.

The logical answer to that is to split the two bigger provinces into smaller ones. Not only would that better distribute power and seats but the people would be better represented provincially. The Ontario Parliament does not represent the well-being of the people in Eastern or northern or even western Ontario anywhere near as well as it does those around Toronto. For much the same reason as the federal parliament doesn't represent Alberta as well as Ontario and Quebec. Likewise the government in Quebec city pretty much ignores western and northern Quebec.