André Boisclair

[Riverwind]

We have already an equitable, loose federation. That is the only part that does not work. Canada has worked very well, better than almost any country in the world but is now floundering because the federation has become too loose.

Yes, that is why there is a sense of tranquility, harmony and unity upon the land and its people.

The biggest problem we have in this country is the people who collect the taxes are not the same people who are responsible for delivering the services. This leads to a perverse system where the people delivering the services can excuse their own failures by simply blaming the people who collect the taxes. We really need to address the broken chain of responsibility in this country.

Personally, I think the all federal transfers (except for equalization) to provincial gov'ts should be eliminated and federal taxes reduced accordingly.

[Bakunin]

We have already an equitable, loose federation. That is the only part that does not work. Canada has worked very well, better than almost any country in the world but is now floundering because the federation has become too loose.

Yes, that is why there is a sense of tranquility, harmony and unity upon the land and its people.

The biggest problem we have in this country is the people who collect the taxes are not the same people who are responsible for delivering the services. This leads to a perverse system where the people delivering the services can excuse their own failures by simply blaming the people who collect the taxes. We really need to address the broken chain of responsibility in this country.

Personally, I think the all federal transfers (except for equalization) to provincial gov'ts should be eliminated and federal taxes reduced accordingly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with that, and if possible, we should favorize "not impose" provincial partnership, provincial trades and to do that, the province will need that extra money from taxes.

We need to base the system on a win-win approach, where nobody is forced to do something he don't want but where they chose exaclty what they want and doesn't want to do and where a true spirit of unity and partnership will prevail. However, august is not pessimist in his message, he his realist. I can't see how it could happend, at least not with the liberals

[fellowtraveller]

The biggest problem we have in this country is the people who collect the taxes are not the same people who are responsible for delivering the services.

I disagree somewhat. Collecting taxes and delivering services are simple mechanical undertakings, steps in a process, symptoms of the disease.

It is the process itself that is the problem. Our governance model simply does not work, and it is rendered inflexible by our Constitution. It enshrines both the Commons and the Senate, both of which have small roles in how the country is managed. The Supreme Court is misplaced, misused and now makes laws instead of interpreting them. The PMOs office, which actually runs the country, constantly interferes in provincial affairs, those same affairs that are apportioned in the Constitution and routinely ignored by Ottawa. There are side deals galore.

We have some serious problems and fundamental issues in this country and they are getting worse. Oddly enough, it will likely take the separation of Quebec to enact change. We are going to be obliged to watch it burn it to the ground and start over, and it isn't going to look much like it does now when it is done.

[Guest eureka]

We do have serious problems in this country: the most serious is that some on these forums are representative of so many in their ignorance of the country. No matter how often they are exposed to actuality they still sing from the same songbook about the federal interference in provincial affairs and the overcentralisation of Canada.

As I have pointed out every time the song is sung, Canada is the most decentralised nation on earth. The central government has few jurisdictional responsibilities.

I have tried to get through some realities such as the proportion of expenditures of the federal to provincial governments. No other nation has the level of local fiscal power that the Canadian provinces have. Canadian Provinces spend three times the proportion of national income that American States do while the federal government spends less than the American. Far less when Healthcare is taken out of the equation.

I cannot be bothered with again addressing the nonsense about the inflexible Constitution and the SCC and Legislature. Just a little attention to all the discussions that have been on this site would show how absurd such claims are.

[tml12]

For the first time in too long, a federalist went on the offensive today in Quebec and a sovereignist ran like a barnyard chicken.

Paul Wells

And you know why they're doing THAT, don't you? This Boisclair guy is the best news the Quebec Liberals have had in ages. A referendum has become less likely, as of last night. And that's the best news I've heard in a long time.

Warren Kinsella

----

I chose August1991 as a sobriquet because of Mikhail Gorbachev, a smart guy. For Gorbachev, in August 1991, everything seemed the same -he flew back to Moscow and the Soviet Union still existed- but in fact everything had changed. (Remember when Yeltsin made Gorbachev publicly read the names... )

Wells and Kinsella, also smart guys, they too don't quite get it. They're like Gorbachev in August 1991.

You are welcome to dismiss my opinion, or sobriquet. But I think many smart English-Canadians have chosen wishful thinking over apparent facts. Like Gorbachev.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

August is right.

There are many debates left to be had, many battles yet to be fought.

Sovereignty will probably never be a dead issue here in Quebec. Dormant, yes; dead, no.

Whether or not Quebec will separate will not only depend on Quebec voters, it will depend on the attitude of English Canadians and the government at the time.

It seems to me, English Canadians, not all, but many of them, are beginning apathetic about the whole Quebec situation.

[Bakunin]

We do have serious problems in this country: the most serious is that some on these forums are representative of so many in their ignorance of the country. No matter how often they are exposed to actuality they still sing from the same songbook about the federal interference in provincial affairs and the overcentralisation of Canada.

As I have pointed out every time the song is sung, Canada is the most decentralised nation on earth. The central government has few jurisdictional responsibilities.

I have tried to get through some realities such as the proportion of expenditures of the federal to provincial governments. No other nation has the level of local fiscal power that the Canadian provinces have. Canadian Provinces spend three times the proportion of national income that American States do while the federal government spends less than the American. Far less when Healthcare is taken out of the equation.

I cannot be bothered with again addressing the nonsense about the inflexible Constitution and the SCC and Legislature. Just a little attention to all the discussions that have been on this site would show how absurd such claims are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Canada was built for the same reason the USSR was built..., for economical and military reason. If it does the same mistake, it will end up just like it did over there, many region forming their own country, tired of the out of touch, corrupt, inflexible, almost dictatorial and manipulative central government.

[fellowtraveller]

We do have serious problems in this country: the most serious is that some on these forums are representative of so many in their ignorance of the country. No matter how often they are exposed to actuality they still sing from the same songbook about the federal interference in provincial affairs and the overcentralisation of Canada.

As I have pointed out every time the song is sung, Canada is the most decentralised nation on earth. The central government has few jurisdictional responsibilities.

I have tried to get through some realities such as the proportion of expenditures of the federal to provincial governments. No other nation has the level of local fiscal power that the Canadian provinces have. Canadian Provinces spend three times the proportion of national income that American States do while the federal government spends less than the American. Far less when Healthcare is taken out of the equation.

I cannot be bothered with again addressing the nonsense about the inflexible Constitution and the SCC and Legislature. Just a little attention to all the discussions that have been on this site would show how absurd such claims are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd agree with you if you were right, but you keep singing the same old Liberal hymn. Who cares what the relativity of expenditures with the US might or might not be? While you argue these irrelevancies, the ship is going down, and its going down because one of the biggest partners will not tolerate your " few jurisdictional responsibilities." Neither will the remaining participants in the aftermath.

You don't have to like it, in fact you're the one who wants to call in the military to lynch Bosclair and his posse, but only an idiot cannot acknowledge what is in front of him and draw some obvious conclusions from the reality.

Keep fiddling Nero.

[Guest eureka]

The ship may well go down. If it does, it will be because there are so many idiots who think that everything that does decide the nature of the country is "irrelevant;" because there are so many lazy thinkers who can not be bothered to concern themselves with what is happening and has happened and what the country really is.

[Guest eureka]

Bakunin. your nonsense becomes unbearable. The USSR was built for all kinds of reasons, mostly as most empires are built through conquest the conquest of independent nations.

Canada was built from some British colonies grouped together for security. Canada is a nation; the USSR was not.

Btw, in reference to your earlier post, it is public money that pays for the tours of CEGEPs. Those tourists are on the public payroll. Almost all the propaganda regarding separatism comes through public funding. Most that came from the PQ governments was disguised as government information.

Then, the referendums themselves are payed for with public money. Money that Canada subsidises through equalization funding.

[Bakunin]

Btw, in reference to your earlier post, it is public money that pays for the tours of CEGEPs. Those tourists are on the public payroll. Almost all the propaganda regarding separatism comes through public funding. Most that came from the PQ governments was disguised as government information.

Fine, then prove it !...

prove to us that someone outside politics like parizeau or the opposition chief landry made their tour trough public funding and disguised as a government information.

If you can't then it will prove what i think, that its your usual bullshitting...

And tell us about the extremist group you where part of... Was it funded by the liberal party ?

[Guest eureka]

Who pays them, Bakunin? Just start there and all will be made clear.

[Bakunin]

For transportation,

Either themselves or their party.

However it doesn't cost a thousand dollars to go talk to the youth...

It takes time and a good car, thats it.

[Riverwind]

Canada was built for the same reason the USSR was built..., for economical and military reason.

You should learn Canadian history. The British invaded Quebec, however, Quebec joined confederation on its own 100 years later. The idea that Quebec is a conquered nation like the former SSRs is nothing but seperatist propaganda.

many region forming their own country, tired of the out of touch, corrupt, inflexible, almost dictatorial and manipulative central government

Comparing the current gov't in Canada to the gov'ts in the former SSRs is about as accurate as comparing the PQ to the Nazi party. I.e. there is no comparison and it rediculous for you the even suggest there is one.

[Bakunin]

Canada was built for the same reason the USSR was built..., for economical and military reason.

You should learn Canadian history. The British invaded Quebec, however, Quebec joined confederation on its own 100 years later. The idea that Quebec is a conquered nation like the former SSRs is nothing but seperatist propaganda.

many region forming their own country, tired of the out of touch, corrupt, inflexible, almost dictatorial and manipulative central government

Comparing the current gov't in Canada to the gov'ts in the former SSRs is about as accurate as comparing the PQ to the Nazi party. I.e. there is no comparison and it rediculous for you the even suggest there is one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Joining a country for military and economic reason when you are under british occupation and finally gaining representativity was definatly a gain at that time.

I totally agree that canada ain't ussr but their are a few similarities. The confederative idea ain't far from the soviet vision. Nobody can deny that canada is built out of a pact from multiple nations and region. There is absolutly no link between a quebecker an inuit and a british columbian except that they all like hockey.

A pact of nations can't be like a natural nation, its all about finding a vision that evryone can agree with. Its a constant work for its survival.

as for my vision of the country, ill clarify it:

FACTS: out of touch, corrupt, inflexible.

OPINIONS: almost dictatorial and manipulative central government.

[Leafless]

Sparhawk

You wrote- " The idea Quebec is a conquered nation like the former SSR's is nothing more than separatist propagana."

Actually there never was any French nation in Canada that played a part in the founding of Canada -what we had in additon to the English nation, the Indians and Eskimos (each comprised of several tribes) -(old terminology)-and the Scots, Irish and French Canadians-all of them forming British a British Nation in the founding of canada --not a French Nation.

This is because after the French defeat on the Plains of Abraham in 1759 the French ceeded to Britain by France in the 1763 Treaty of Paris, all French North America except for St.Pierre and Miquelon two small islands of the south shore of Newfounland.

This left nothing but a British Nation dominating Canada.

[Riverwind]

as for my vision of the country, ill clarify it:

FACTS: out of touch, corrupt, inflexible.

OPINIONS: almost dictatorial and manipulative central government.

Your facts are really opinions:

The Liberals are in touch with what at least some people want - if they weren't they would not get elected.

The federation is extremely flexible, in fact, it is the flexibility that allowed the federal gov't to intrude in areas of provincial juristiction. What you are asking for is a less felxible federation where the federal gov't has very limited powers.

It is also ludicous to say the Canadian gov't is corrupt - the sponsership scandal was an isolated event created by a few individuals and the amount of money was relatively insignifcant. More importantly, this corruption cannot be compared to the rampant corruption in the former SSRs.

[tml12]

as for my vision of the country, ill clarify it:

FACTS: out of touch, corrupt, inflexible.

OPINIONS: almost dictatorial and manipulative central government.

Your facts are really opinions:

The Liberals are in touch with what at least some people want - if they weren't they would not get elected.

The federation is extremely flexible, in fact, it is the flexibility that allowed the federal gov't to intrude in areas of provincial juristiction. What you are asking for is a less felxible federation where the federal gov't has very limited powers.

It is also ludicous to say the Canadian gov't is corrupt - the sponsership scandal was an isolated event created by a few individuals and the amount of money was relatively insignifcant. More importantly, this corruption cannot be compared to the rampant corruption in the former SSRs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sparkawk,

I agree generally with your post but to say the money wasted was insignificant is a bit much.

Just what is a specific amount of money, then?

[Riverwind]

I agree generally with your post but to say the money wasted was insignificant is a bit much.

The commission struck to find out what happened to the money cost almost as much as the money that was mispent. A single election or national referendum costs more. The money lost is not trivial and would add up to something serious if the same kind of waste was repeated over and over again - at the same time it is not all that signficant compared to the amount of money spent by the government every year.