Western Alienation

[Remus]

Actually, I support the concept that the more local a government, the more powerful it should be. A politician's power should be directly proportional to the proximity of that politician's electorate. That way, we don't have distant governments dictating to people how they should live.

This makes sense, I think.

Toronto exports $2B a year in tax money, according to Craig Read's website.

I agree also local government should control more of the purse strings after all they have to provide most of the services. I don't think it is a good idea that many local governments have to go begging to the Feds to get their money back. Cutting out some of the middle man government might be a good way to keep this country together.

Some government in the future also needs to adress the issue ot the chronic have not provinces. Unemployment rates are far to high in Atlantic Canada and have been this way for far to long. Something new has to be tried because what has been done is obviously not working.

[Black Dog]

My last thought on separation: we have the Clarity Act.

50 per cent plus one is all it takes.

If y'all want out, just give'r.

[idealisttotheend]

Both Stockwell Day and Steven Harper have represented a large compromise on the part of westerners, being far more Central leaning than Preston Manning and the original Reformers.

I agree, and I agreed with some of Manning's ideas. Nevertheless, Manning could never sell it to Ontario and he didn't really understand or was prepared for the can of worms opening the constitution would cause, especially in Quebec. But the answer is not to give up but to try to find people that agree with you in say rural Ontario and among the "nationalists" of Quebec.

Ah, so I should leave my home because you don't like my belief that British Columbia should have the same right of self-determination that Ottawa got from London?

Ah, so you would take my home from me because you don't like my Country, because you believe BC is superior to Canada? Don't you see the divisions inherent to your position?

It makes sense; the distance, including political, cultural and financially is almost the same in comparing Upper and Lower Canada's relationship with Westminster and BC's relationship with Ottawa.

This isn't 1870 and it is possible to get across the mountains without the help of the railroad. Distances are shrinking to the point where they are what you make them out to be frankly. Martin was in Ontario and BC in the same day during the recent election campaign and Vancouver's "culture" is as far from Kelowna as it is close to Toronto's. You are completely ignoring the plain evidence of the vote in the last election. The split is rural-urban moreso than it is regional.

I'm curious why you seem to think that Canada is not a legitimate demarcation.

You are the one who seems to think that it is not legitiimate since you want to seperate. Beware the next guy who comes along and makes the same argument that you make about Canada regarding the divisibility of BC.

Actually, I support the concept that the more local a government, the more powerful it should be. A politician's power should be directly proportional to the proximity of that politician's electorate. That way, we don't have distant governments dictating to people how they should live.

Oddly, John A. MacDonald had the exact same position.

Mr. MacDonald fought all his political career for a strong centeral government from before confederation until his death. He annoyed quite a few primiers as I recall. I'd be interested in why you think otherwise.

The federal government has practically no say over how you live your life which is another fact you stubbornly ignore. BTW, the rights to abortion and gay rights actually give all people more freedom on how to live lives though I doubt you'll agree.

Either you learned french via "Hooked on Phonics" and agree with me or you're whining.

I point out, sir, your insistance on using "we" to refer to a group of people you seem to be trying to convince us think just like you do when they clearly don't. I don't ever whine even when I don't get the election result I wanted.

Sir.

But aren't you saying exactly what you're accusing me of about "Canada"? I mean, aren't you saying that the citizens of all ten provinces are exactly like each other?

I am saying nothing of the kind. Canada is a highly diverse country and I relish that. You are trying to claim that "the west" is homogenous enough to have a culture and values so distinct from the rest of Canada's that it ought to be a seperate entity. There is clearly no evidence to support this. Don't believe me look at MSs election anyalsis thread and tell me a majority of "Westerners" even voted Conservative. They didn't and mostly because of BC I might point out.

And how would you feel if the senators for Ontario and Quebec were selected by Calgarians?

If the PCs would have kept Joe Clark in the early 80s then that's exactly what would have happened (High RIver is close enough to Calgary I expect). And there was this guy from Prince Albert who appointed a senator or two.

Surely it must work both ways. I see little difference between Ontario and Quebec, especially along the border regions? Why not drop 24 of the senators and have those two provinces share too?

If you see little difference between Ontario and Quebec you have some seriously dark glasses on. Protestant/Catholic, French/English "small" differences historically I'm sure.

Third, you're attempting to bait the conversation in an absolutely silly direction: You're trying to provoke a response that you can then hold up as proof of the "dangerous" British Columbian gun toting redneck. It has failed absolutely and you should be ashamed of such a pathetic attempt.

To fight sir rarely requires rocks and sticks. There are political fights, emotional fights even verbal ones. The fight in Quebec has little to do with the FLQ but it has been and continues to be a fight nonetheless. One that turns family members against other family members and neighbour against neighbour. And still violence can not be completely ruled out when such ideologies come into play. If people can die over some damn golf course I don't see why this couldn't turn nasty that way.

This may shock you, but we're not Quebeckers.

Sure sound like PQists to me.

Anyway I'll conclude by agreeing with BD. You can't even get this 'we' you constantly talk about to include even 20% of Albertans never mind any BCers. Good luck trying to convince people to destabilize their lives over some stupid ideological whine you have about the federal government not listening to you.

[DAC]

If you're talking about social issues here, I think it's a fallacy to associate social conservatism with the west. Small town Ontario shares many of the same values, and they will lean towards the CPC.

Good point. One analysis I saw claimed that the real split in the election was not provincial but urban/rural. I suspect there is at least a large element of that.

[DAC]

Does the West want out? No. I was born and raised there, and most of my family are still there. The West does not want out, today.

At the same time, there is a wide-spread sense of alienation. On another political web-site, a discussion of Harper's proper future came up with the almost unanimous sentiment that a Western leader could not be elected PM. I don't think the writers were westerners. I've seen similar, though not as extreme, suggestions on the Mapleleafweb, here. That expresses the cause of Western alienation. It is the sense that the West is excluded from having a meaningful role in the government of this land.

They've changed the system to ease the effect, now, but often when I was young, when our polls closed in Saskatchewan, the radio announced that the government had already been decided before one Western vote had been counted. When that is the case (and this election we have a government which was chosen almost entirely in the East) two things happen.

1. The ruling group feels no need to pay attention to the West's concerns, because they can be re-elected with hardly a seat in the West. (We all know that their principle concern is getting re-elected, not serving the country.)

2. Whether or not the government pays attention to Western concerns, the West feels that it doesn't, because they know the government doesn't need them.

That means there is a wide sense of alienation. At this point separation is not a real issue. But if that alienation is supported by the way "business" is done in government, it could lead to a meaningful separatist movement. Part of being a country is being concerned for everybody in it, even those with whom you have the least in common.

[Goldie]

I think Albertans should realize that Ontario now has the exact same representation in the Conservative caucus.

All those years of being the predominate voice in caucus has ended. Ontario has just said we want in.....to the party. I guess you should be carefull of what you wish for. This time Ontarios voice is equal, next time Alberta may be the minority in caucus and have very little influence.

If Quebec gets on board further influencing the party.....well you can see where this is going. Bye -Bye Alberta dominated party. We are really just two elections away from becoming Progressive Conservatives again, as Urban Ontario and the east and Quebec invade it.

This is what Conservatives are hoping for when they wish to form government. Once you elect enough from these regions (Toronto,Quebec, Atlantic) they become the shaping force of the party. Think about it Albertans, no where else to grow. Change or be changed, we have reached the glass ceiling.

[Big Blue Machine]

There will always be western alienation in Parliment.

[Remus]

I think Albertans should realize that Ontario now has the exact same representation in the Conservative caucus.

All those years of being the predominate voice in caucus has ended. Ontario has just said we want in.....to the party. I guess you should be carefull of what you wish for. This time Ontarios voice is equal, next time Alberta may be the minority in caucus and have very little influence.

If Quebec gets on board further influencing the party.....well you can see where this is going. Bye -Bye Alberta dominated party. We are really just two elections away from becoming Progressive Conservatives again, as Urban Ontario and the east and Quebec invade it.

This is what Conservatives are hoping for when they wish to form government. Once you elect enough from these regions (Toronto,Quebec, Atlantic) they become the shaping force of the party. Think about it Albertans, no where else to grow. Change or be changed, we have reached the glass ceiling.

Previous to this election B.C. had more seats for the C.A. than Alberta did.

If your Progressive Conservative party ignores Alberta, Albertans will leave the party in mass. Much like 93.

[Michael Hardner]

If your Progressive Conservative party ignores Alberta, Albertans will leave the party in mass. Much like 93.

Then you'll be talking about splitting 28 seats or so in Alberta with your "new" party, or a fraction of a threat to the larger CPC than the Bloc now is to the Liberals.

There are many fringe parties that would welcome your support.

[Cartman]

Previously, I stated that Western alienation is a serious issue and that stereotyping is a part of this problem. Several responses demonstrate that I am correct because not all Conservatives ran on the issue of alienation and not all those alienated voted CPC. You would never know that from the responses on this board though.

The Bloc intentionally TRIES to make federalism unworkable and they are rewarded for this effort. Cons are viewed by many as the best way to send Ottawa a cry for help as our economy is being devastated (energy taxes, Wheat Board, BSE, softwood etc.). If nothing else, they will reduce taxes, gov't revenues thereby reducing the relevance and influence of unfair government. This is why we all have a min. gov't with no mandate.

[Remus]

If your Progressive Conservative party ignores Alberta, Albertans will leave the party in mass. Much like 93.

Then you'll be talking about splitting 28 seats or so in Alberta with your "new" party, or a fraction of a threat to the larger CPC than the Bloc now is to the Liberals.

There are many fringe parties that would welcome your support.

All I am saying is that the P.C.s never won an election with out the west in the last 75 years. I also think it is important for a party to have a large, solid, and growing region as an electoral base.

Alberta has always tended to vote in large blocks, whether it was SoCred, P.C., Reform, Aliance, CPC, U.F.A., so I do not think the 28 seats would be split very evenly.

Right now the country does not need another Reform , P.C. split.

[August1991]

The Bloc intentionally TRIES to make federalism unworkable and they are rewarded for this effort.

Not true.

The existence of the BQ is frequently debated in PQ circles. Many view the BQ as sending reps to a foreign parliament.

Duceppe has argued that the BQ best represents the interests of Quebec. He frequently gives the example of 1980 when Quebec gave 74 of 75 seats to Trudeau who then proceeded to patriate the Constitution without Quebec's consent. (Trudeau always claimed he had that consent through the federal MPs. Since 1980, the Liberals have never done well in francophone Quebec.)

On election night, Duceppe held out an olive branch to ROC. He says often that la politique du pire est la pire des politiques. He has said that the best way to advance the independance cause is to be reasonable with ROC and respectful.

You must understand that souvérainistes/separatists are patient.

Compare: The French and Indian Wars (Seven Years War) started in 1756 and the US Constitution was signed in 1789. The origins of the US Civil War started at least 30 years before 1861.

[I miss Reagan]

The problem is Canada has no tolerance for differing views within one party. There really is no point of haveing 308 elected representatives. They all must toe the party line anyway. If we're going to be the dictatorship that the east wants us to be why don't we quit pretending to be democratic and just elect one man and save the money?

[Goldie]

Remus,

What I am saying is now is the time for the Conservatives to recognize where the growth lies.

Harper stated, "we need the red Tory vision of social programs." He only said it once as far as I know and did not say it loud enough.

If the Conservatives fail here, well, you can see a Canada where the NDP or Bloq have more influence in Canada.

We can't keep watching a rump party flow between fifty and a hundred seats like the NDP flows from eight to twenty back and fourth decades after decades going nowhere.

What is better in Alberta eyes, the Red Tory vision within a party or the NDP's vision in government?

[takeanumber]

If your Progressive Conservative party ignores Alberta, Albertans will leave the party in mass. Much like 93.

Therein lies the problem.

Calgarians were in Cabinet during the disasterous Mulroney government.

I don't think most Canadians have forgiven the last set of Cons.

Unless Alberta can learn how to play with the other Children in the sandbox, nobody is going to eve try to meet them halfway.

[playfullfellow]

I don't think most Canadians have forgiven the last set of Cons

Sort of like the West not forgiving the Liberals for the NEP?

[caesar]

Playful; Do not say West when you mean Alberta.

We in BC are the REAL west;I haven't heard anyone grumbling or even discussing it here.

I am all for Canadian ownership for ALL our resources and our media.

[idealisttotheend]

That's a good point Casaer. It's okay if the Americans own half the oil outright but everyone remembers the NEP as is mad at Ottawa. Very interesting,

[takeanumber]

Hardcore.

Bravo.

[playfullfellow]

Caesar, I was just stating that the NEP is one of the reasons the West, yes the West, does not trust the Liberals. The NEP took money from the West and gave it to central Canada. Yeah, it hurt Alberta more than anyone and that is evident in how Alberta voted but Alberta survived. If by REAL WEST, you mean the furthest western province, yep you are correct, you pass geography. Just for your info, I lived in BC for almost 16 years, I think it is a great province. I have been in every province Quebec west, I love this country. I chose to live in Alberta because I have the greatest oppertunity for myself and my family here. I do know a lot of people in BC and they do not seem to have your view of the whole scene. We do not see eye to eye on a lot of things, that is part of debate.

The NEP sucked between 50-100 billion out of Alberta in a very short amount of time. Most of this money went to central canada and Quebec. 1.7 billion went to buy Perto Canada. Are Canadians going to get a share from the sale of PetroCan this year? We all paid for it. Thats a lot of freaking money and why wouldn't Albertans still be sore? It took almost 11 years to recover from what the NEP did to Alberta. But being a bunch of persistent red necks, Alberta survived in stars. I for one am not a seperatist, I looked into to it but it made no sense to me, I am a Canadian.

I am all for Canadian ownership for ALL our resources and our media

This is strictly provincial territory. Why should someone in Toronto cash in because natural resource prices in BC are high? That money should stay in the province. If they want ownership, buy shares. We already pay taxes on these resources, why should we bankrupt provinces that have plenty of resources?

Anyways, I didn't look at this election as an east west fight, that is a waste of time. I looked at this election as a potential for having better things for my family without getting taxed out the ying yang.

[Bionic Antboy]

All this talk of Western Alienation is driving me nuts!

The rest of Canada doesn't have a problem with the West (er, Alberta), or a potenetial leader coming from the West. The reason they never win is that they are CONSISTENTLY socially far right.

If the alienation you're so worried about is because of issues like gay marriage, abortion and going to war, the the "Best in the West" lucked out in getting the seats he did in Ontario, mainly because of the thievery of the federal Libs, not because of a positive message from Harper.

Find someone with a clear voice, who isn't socially regressive, and he/she would have done WAY better than Harper did. For example, both Stronach and Clement had a better chance of getting more seats in Ontario.

That's just my opinion. And I realize when I say West, I'm not speaking for all the West, because I have relatives Calgary, Winnipeg and Regina and good friends in BC and the kind of Western Separatist extremism I'm hearing here isn't what I'm getting from them.

The stats bear it out too... Let's take a look at the popular vote, in BC and Alberta (since it's people on this board talking about "alienation") and their percieved issues with Ontario/Quebec...

Popular Vote...

British Columbia

Party/2000/2004/Change

Lib: 27.7%, 28.6%, up 0.9%

Con: 56.7%, 36.2%, down 20.5%

New Dem: 11.3%, 26.6%, up 15.3%

Alberta

Party/2000/2004/Change

Lib: 20.9%, 22.0%, up 1.1%

Con: 72.4%, 61.6%, down 10.8%

New Dem: 5.4%, 9.5%, up 4.1%

Ontario

Party/2000/2004/Change

Lib: 51.5%, 44.7%, down 6.8%

Con: 38.0%, 31.5%, down 6.5%

New Dem: 8.3%, 18.1%, up 9.8%

Quebec

Party/2000/2004/Change

Lib: 44.2%, 37.9%, down 6.3%

Con: 11.8%, 8.6%, down 3.2%

New Dem: 1.8%, 4.6%, up 2.8%

Bloc: 39.9%, 48.8%, up 8.9%

The Libs were down everywhere except BC, and there they were up by less than 1%. The Cons were down across the board. The NDP was up everywhere, and the Bloc was up as well.

If you really want to reform the national relationship between the different regions, it seems that some form of proportional representation would be the best way to go.

Quebec has it's voice because of the Bloc. 11% of the popular vote, but 55 seats? That's WAY unbalanced. What if EVERY province had their own "Bloc", the nation would crumble, and the quality of life for EVERY region would suffer. If we complain about the power of a united Canada on the world stage, what about 10 smaller countries? It would be a mess.

Forget the rhetoric of Harper, playing up the "alienation" theme.

Anyone who feels "alienated" should be asking for, nay, demanding, we look at proportional representation, across the board. Maybe THEN there can be REAL, positive change in the structure of governing this vast nation.

[takeanumber]

I'd be in favour of Prop. Rep.

The Bloc might not be.

But I believe in one person, one vote.

The smaller regions and Quebec are always more than adequately represented in cabinet.

[Boydfish]

Ah, so you would take my home from me because you don't like my Country, because you believe BC is superior to Canada?

I never said that BC was superior to Canada. I've said that BC is different, not superior.

Distances are shrinking to the point where they are what you make them out to be frankly.

So why don't we eliminate the confederal government and return power to Westminster? We'd save billions.

You are the one who seems to think that it is not legitiimate since you want to seperate.

That's a pretty large leap that, I'm afraid, you're taking on your own.

Did the BNA of 1867 make the British Empire illegitimate? Exactly where did J.MacDonald say "The British government is not legitimate!".

Beware the next guy who comes along and makes the same argument that you make about Canada regarding the divisibility of BC.

I wouldn't fear him in the slightest. If it makes more sense for BC to split back down to British Columbia, Vancouver Island and New Caledonia, then have at 'er. That's one of the beauties of the Westminster System of government: You can get a whole new country without once being a traitor to the Crown.

The federal government has practically no say over how you live your life which is another fact you stubbornly ignore.

I own guns. As such, lad, I can rest certain that there is a high degree of Canadian government interference in my life.

BTW, the rights to abortion and gay rights actually give all people more freedom on how to live lives though I doubt you'll agree.

You have no idea on my positions on either topic, so what you're doing is applying a stereotype onto me.

I don't ever whine even when I don't get the election result I wanted.

The first time that Ontario and Quebec don't get the rest they wanted, we'll see about that.

You are trying to claim that "the west" is homogenous enough to have a culture and values so distinct from the rest of Canada's that it ought to be a seperate entity.

You know, perhaps we should both stop posting: You seem to want to speak for both your side and mine.

I am not claiming that the west is homogenous. In fact, I'd say that British Columbians are as different from Albertans as we are from Canadians.

Next, we're seperate from Australia, Britain and even the US, but that doesn't seem to hamper us in any way. Explain why it is important for Ontario to even have a little say into BC's affairs or vice versa.

If you see little difference between Ontario and Quebec you have some seriously dark glasses on. Protestant/Catholic, French/English "small" differences historically I'm sure.

Excuse me, but we're talking about the border areas, aren't we? You claimed that the differences between the people living on either side of the BC-Alberta border were insignifigant. I'm sure that you can say the same of Ontario and Quebec.

And still violence can not be completely ruled out when such ideologies come into play.

Nor can it be counted on absolutely. Yet again, I'll throw the example of Canada back at you: No Union Jacks were burned in 1867, nor were the British chased out. Ditto in 1931. Yet again in 1982.

Unlike franco-socialist republics, the Westminster system promotes a lawful and peaceful change of government.

[Remus]

Remus,

What I am saying is now is the time for the Conservatives to recognize where the growth lies.

Harper stated, "we need the red Tory vision of social programs." He only said it once as far as I know and did not say it loud enough.

If the Conservatives fail here, well, you can see a Canada where the NDP or Bloq have more influence in Canada.

We can't keep watching a rump party flow between fifty and a hundred seats like the NDP flows from eight to twenty back and fourth decades after decades going nowhere.

What is better in Alberta eyes, the Red Tory vision within a party or the NDP's vision in government?

I agree. I was stating that if the party is not truely an economic and fiscal conservative party, and ignores western Canada, they will not get seats in western Canada. Red Tories in the party would be welcomed by myself. But if this means David Orchard running the party then I would find it difficult to send my support.

[Big Blue Machine]

The Liberals can stay "Screw the West, We'll take the rest. There's 195 seats in Eastern Canada (Ontario Eastward), and only like 80 seats in the West.