Albertans and Quebeckers

[CANADIEN]

I am as much amased by your narrow vision of your own country than you are regarding your understanding of "quebec separatism".

As most of your postings show, their understanding is ten mile wide compared to yours.

No problems! We will offer you an association but we won't insist if you reject it.

Interesting, isn't it, that the sovereignists have been saying for most of the past 40 years to Québécois that they had nothing to fear from sovereignty because there would be an offer for a new parternship and Canada would be so happy to accept it.

Québec has always had more respect more respect for the aboriginals than you did. Forget about it.

Which is why some Aboriginal leaders won't even speak to Quebec officials at federal-provincial-First nation conference.

Plus, the integrity of our territory regards only Québec.

Let's follow the logic here. Quebec is a Nation, therefore the integrity of its borders is its business only. And...

First Nations are Nations. Therefore, the integrity of their territory, including what cou ntry they want it to be part of, is their business only. The same principal applies. Unless, of course, someone wants to promote imperialism (to use your own words).

Quebec's claims are legitimated and fair.

There is nothing fair in the claim that nothing should happen in Canada without the blessing of the Quebec government.

[Benz]

You don't have to convince me. You have to convince all those aboriginals!

What will Quebec do if the native peoples in your province don't want to leave Canada?

What will you do if the natives in Canada wants to join Québec?

TROC isn't likely to send troops in but the native folks well might take up arms! We all remember how much appreciation for Quebec's respect was shown by Lasagna at Oka.

Oh that was a total different story. The federalists were Quebec's government back then. Also, the Mohawks have always been a different case from the others. Since the 2001 Paix des braves treaty, the relations with the natives are very good. Better than they had with the federal government since the beginning.

No, that will be Quebec's problem, at least at first. If it leads to bloodshed, I'm not sure what Canada would do. We do have treaty obligations...

Don't worry. It won't. It's not even considered.

Oh well, I'm sure you're quite right! The natives will be overjoyed to stay with a separate Quebec and it will be all sweetness and light!

You don't get it. Natives don't care. To do not belong neither with Canada, nor Québec. They are only interested to get a better future.

You and I can argue tlll the cows come home. It will have to happen before we'd know who's right.

We will see when we get there. I'm confident.

[CANADIEN]

You don't get it. Natives don't care. To do not belong neither with Canada, nor Québec. They are only interested to get a better future.

It was either the Cree or the Inuit who had their own referendum just before the referendum of 1995, about whther or not they waould want to join an independant Quebec. The huge majority was NO. They do care.

[Roger Steele]

How does the rest of Canada deal with the incessant whining coming from Albertans and separatist Quebeckers?

You are most likely from Ontario. Where the liberal votes are bought and paid for with the tax dollars from the rest of Canada.

[Michael Hardner]

You are most likely from Ontario. Where the liberal votes are bought and paid for with the tax dollars from the rest of Canada.

Like where ? Saskatchewan, which was a have-no province for years ? Atlantic Canada ?

Toronto is a net payer for the rest of Canada - Northern Ontario is more like the west in attitude and meteorology than it is like we Torontonians.

The rest of Canada penalizes us for living in the centre of the universe, and Harper decided to hold his G8 Travelling Roadshow in our backyard, nearly burning down our town.

Honestly, Torontonians have to spend SO much time on here educating people from other parts of the country...

[AngusThermopyle]

Like where ? Saskatchewan, which was a have-no province for years ? Atlantic Canada ?

Toronto is a net payer for the rest of Canada - Northern Ontario is more like the west in attitude and meteorology than it is like we Torontonians.

The rest of Canada penalizes us for living in the centre of the universe, and Harper decided to hold his G8 Travelling Roadshow in our backyard, nearly burning down our town.

Honestly, Torontonians have to spend SO much time on here educating people from other parts of the country...

This post is absolutely exceptional in that it serves to illustrate some of the reasons that people who do not live in that open cess pool you call Toronto regard it and its inhabitants with scorn and derision. Your conceit and arrogance shine through clearly.

[Smallc]

This post is absolutely exceptional in that it serves to illustrate some of the reasons that people who do not live in that open cess pool you call Toronto regard it and its inhabitants with scorn and derision. Your conceit and arrogance shine through clearly.

Obviously you don't understand that concept of a joke. That said, the points that Michael made inside the joke are completely correct.

Edited April 21, 2011 by Smallc

[Michael Hardner]

This post is absolutely exceptional in that it serves to illustrate some of the reasons that people who do not live in that open cess pool you call Toronto regard it and its inhabitants with scorn and derision. Your conceit and arrogance shine through clearly.

I'm sorry, I'm afraid that (yet again) you have misunderstood what a Torontonian was trying to teach you.

(Hint: see the emoticon at the end of my post)

[Benz]

Interesting, isn't it, that the sovereignists have been saying for most of the past 40 years to Québécois that they had nothing to fear from sovereignty because there would be an offer for a new parternship and Canada would be so happy to accept it.

Yes. We will be glad to accept an union with the ROC. Based on a confederation model, like the actual EU or something like that. 90% of the sovereignists are former federalists fedup waiting that the ROC understands Québec. I am one of them. I was federalist in 1990. I got confused between 1990 and 1992 and in 1992, I became officially sovereignist. The sovereinists are more than willing to negociate a constructive union.

Which is why some Aboriginal leaders won't even speak to Quebec officials at federal-provincial-First nation conference.

Québec and the Cree signed a nation-to-nation deal without the intervention of the federal. The first time that such treaty is signed since the last aboriginal tribe felt in the hands of the federal and reduced to a reserve. In your face.

Let's follow the logic here. Quebec is a Nation, therefore the integrity of its borders is its business only. And...

First Nations are Nations. Therefore, the integrity of their territory, including what cou ntry they want it to be part of, is their business only. The same principal applies. Unless, of course, someone wants to promote imperialism (to use your own words).

Just for your knowledge, Québec has already agree with the Cree, the Innus and the Inuits. They all have new sovereignty on a respectable piece of land. They do NOT wish to lose that. If you want a chance to convince them to f--- things up with us, you gonna have to start respect them more than what you do now with the natives outside Québec. Otherwise they will never beleive your lies. They are more chances that the natives outside want to join Québec than the other way around. The Innu of Labrador to start with.

Anyway, if you think you know how the natives think, you may got a heck of a surprise. Neither you, nor me can speak in their names.

There is nothing fair in the claim that nothing should happen in Canada without the blessing of the Quebec government.

Indeed. Who is asking that? That is not what I said. You have serious difficulty to concentrate and read exactly what I wrote. I said Québec should have a constitutional veto on the constitution. I didn't say Québec should have a veto on the House of Common or the Senate.

[guyser]

The simple answer is that Quebec cannot afford to split. Not a chance.

Think of it this way, to "divorce Canada" would mean that assets get split.

Quebec cannot afford to pay.....

-half price for the Govt of Canada prop and buildings

-pay back half of the funding initiatives started.

-pay the Que percentage of the Nat'l debt

We can stop there but lets not forget the richest part of your province would be gone too. The Indians would own that.

In some ways it wuld be comical to watch Que asking for cheaper rates on electricity from the 1st Nations...."Nope, heres the price , take it or leave it bitches !"

Yea yea, shcadenfreude and all that.....

[Michael Hardner]

Quebec cannot afford to pay.....

-half price for the Govt of Canada prop and buildings

-pay back half of the funding initiatives started.

-pay the Que percentage of the Nat'l debt

How about the federal incentives for businesses to locate in that province ?

[guyser]

How about the federal incentives for businesses to locate in that province ?

Oh you can pile a mother s*** load on top of those. Didnt want to belabour the point.

[Shwa]

What will you do if the natives in Canada wants to join Québec?

You still don't get it. Quebec is a mere province and has no standing on federal treaties with the First Nations at the national level. Quebec is a landless idea that is held in trust at the federal level in land agreements with many First Nations. If you want to see how it works, look at Nunavut. Quebec can be as easily carved up. Maybe you should learn to speak Cree...

[Scotty]

The rest of Canada penalizes us for living in the centre of the universe, and Harper decided to hold his G8 Travelling Roadshow in our backyard, nearly burning down our town.

That was your own incompetent police force, guy.

[Michael Hardner]

That was your own incompetent police force, guy.

Our police force set those fires ? Whoa.

[GostHacked]

It never fails to amaze how people can buy the political propaganda coming from Quebec's nationalist industry. Ontario pays out billions every year to 'have-not' provinces like Quebec. Which is absurd. It's not like Quebec doesn't have the people or resources to pay its own bills, if it just wasn't so incompetently run by socialists who don't understand fiscal policy.

The Bloc to me represents one region and one region only, I can't consider them a national party for they have little if any members outside of Quebec. They've tabled the separation refferendum a couple times and failed both times. Either just do it and separate, or finnaly become one with the rest of Canada.

It's like Manning's Reform Party of the west. Only had Western Canada's interests, but the differece with them is that it represented more than one province.

I would really love to see Quebec separate, just to have you all look around your very first budget and wonder how the hell you're going to pay for all the stuff you have without doubling your already high taxes. The realization that Greece has a healthier fiscal state than you guys without money pouring in from Alberta and Ontario would be a treasure to see.

From the last refferendum, the separation would only happen if they could continue to use the CND while they got their own monertary/currency up and running. There is no desire to have a Quebec dollar as far as I know.

And Greece has had a very tough time in the lat year with their finances ( EU bail out) so to say they are in better shape than Quebec I think is wrong.

[Benz]

You still don't get it. Quebec is a mere province and has no standing on federal treaties with the First Nations at the national level. Quebec is a landless idea that is held in trust at the federal level in land agreements with many First Nations. If you want to see how it works, look at Nunavut. Quebec can be as easily carved up. Maybe you should learn to speak Cree...

Can you read english? Here is a pdf document for you. So you stop saying anything.

http://www.autochtones.gouv.qc.ca/relations_autochtones/ententes/cris/20020207_en.htm

[HistoryBuff44]

How about the federal incentives for businesses to locate in that province ?

I think it curious that in general we never get any information about how they would manage their finances as an independent state. All we hear is how it would be great for Quebec. um, how? overburdened with debt and deficit spending as well as having to deal with the relocation of businesses outside of your province because they don't want to deal with your socialist bureaucracy. it would be great for about 2 years after that the reality of the situation would kick in.

the worst part about all the talk is that it doesn't illustrate the side that wants to stay. they lost the vote 2 times, which means a bigger part wants to remain. the PQ leadership simply ignore the results as if it didn't happen; laughable since they are the reason the vote happened in the first place. The part of the province that wants to stay need to speak up and let the others know they are sick of their banter. Unfortunately, the PQ are the only ones doing the talking in Quebec. The pro-Canada side needs to tell them if they want to leave Canada so bad then pack their stuff and go. That Quebec is a part of Canada which despite our issues is one of if not the greatest nation on the planet.

[guyser]

What will you do if the natives in Canada wants to join Québec?

Never happen. I kind of wish they would but they arent stupid.

Why?

Then they would be considered people of another nation and the govt could close that file and say "Hey, they arent living in Canada so I am not bound to help them.

Not to mention, 1St Nations know Canada has the money, they know the Quebec money is there due to the largesse of Canada ( in some degree)

And they want their bills paid, and they know Que cant afford it.

[TimG]

Then they would be considered people of another nation and the govt could close that file and say "Hey, they arent living in Canada so I am not bound to help them.

They also have been fighting for decades with Canada and have numerous SCC judgements that define their rights. I would be surprised if they would give that up for a promise that their rights would be respected by a new Quebec SC.

[bloodyminded]

I'm a little surprised that people don't recall Martin telling Nova Scotians not to vote for Peter McKay because Calgarians would be running the show.

I'm certainly surprised that people don't recall Paul Martin standing on the stage next to his new best friend Buzz Hargrove, applauding while Hargrove accused Harper of being from Alberta and having Alberta values and not Canadian values. And in particular, I'm surprised that nobody outside of Alberta even seemed offended by it.

I felt a little "kicked" at the time.

-k

So, two examples--both by Paul Martin--explains this "kicking"?

Hell, Harper made some derogatory comments about the Maritimes...which I had forgotten until this very instant. Because I don't think everybody's picking on the poor little vocal minority of Maritimers who cherish their victim politics.

Nor do I think the poor little vocal minority of Professional Albertan Victims are to be taken seriously.

So I don't. Nobody does.

[kimmy]

So, two examples--both by Paul Martin--explains this "kicking"?

That was not an exhaustive list. Yourself and Canadien expressed doubt that Paul Martin had played "the Alberta card" in his 2006 campaign. I was just refreshing your memories.

The real "kick" isn't that it occured. The "kick" is that this is apparently a viable vote-getting strategy in other parts of the country.

Michael Ignatieff is the first Liberal leader in a long time (since John Turner, maybe?) who hasn't turned hostile to Alberta when it was politically advantageous.

-k

[Wild Bill]

The simple answer is that Quebec cannot afford to split. Not a chance.

Think of it this way, to "divorce Canada" would mean that assets get split.

Quebec cannot afford to pay.....

-half price for the Govt of Canada prop and buildings

-pay back half of the funding initiatives started.

-pay the Que percentage of the Nat'l debt

We can stop there but lets not forget the richest part of your province would be gone too. The Indians would own that.

In some ways it wuld be comical to watch Que asking for cheaper rates on electricity from the 1st Nations...."Nope, heres the price , take it or leave it bitches !"

Yea yea, shcadenfreude and all that.....

Guyser, you may be quite right on what Quebec SHOULD pay as it's half of what's owed, but it doesn't matter.

If Quebec separates, it is a dead certainty that Quebec will calculate ITSELF what it owes, if anything!

You have to remember that the PeQuistes and the Bloc are really socialist parties. By the time they get through with their math, TROC will owe THEM!

Whatever they owe, they simply won't pay! Period and end of story. If Canada tries to put pressure on them to pay their debts, they will start their "victim" whining!

Most likely they will expect that Ottawa will continue to give them transfer payments and pay all the welfare an pension cheques. What they don't understand is that it would be political suicide for any party in Ottawa to do such a thing after a separation.

No party is likely to do that just to please Quebec as she goes out the door! It would be a very bitter, angry and emotional divorce.

The lawyers will make millions for years!

[bloodyminded]

That was not an exhaustive list. Yourself and Canadien expressed doubt that Paul Martin had played "the Alberta card" in his 2006 campaign. I was just refreshing your memories.

I never expressed any doubt about it. I only think that it doesn't provide evidence that Alberta has been "kicked around" forever and a day...and still is, by the way, according to some people.

The real "kick" isn't that it occured. The "kick" is that this is apparently a viable vote-getting strategy in other parts of the country.

Why do you suppose that Martin's remarks were key to an election victory?

If Harper were to gain a majority, would that be evidence that Canadians support contempt for Parliament?

Does the Conservative MP here in Fredericton prove that Harper's "culture of defeat" remark about the Maritimes is taken as apt and accurate by Maritimers, and that it is part of the reason for a Conservative vote?

I don't believe this at all. Martin's remark was a gaffe, not a plus, and had nothing to do with Conservative defeat. Harper's remark was also a gaffe, and had nothing to do with the Conservative victory.

Michael Ignatieff is the first Liberal leader in a long time (since John Turner, maybe?) who hasn't turned hostile to Alberta when it was politically advantageous.

-k

I think some people are too sensitive, and see "hostility," like Communists, under every bed.

Edited April 23, 2011 by bloodyminded