Atlantic Union

[[email protected]]

Should the provinces of Atlantic Canada unite?

[Wilber]

Should the provinces of Atlantic Canada unite?

If they want.

[[email protected]]

Should the provinces of Atlantic Canada unite?

If they want.

Unite the four provinces into one province with one legislature and one provincial government inside Canada. That allows:

1. Atlantic Canada a larger more unified voice with which to speak in Canada

2. A rationalization and better co-ordination of provincial policies

3. Economic union

4. A region commensurate with other regions in Canada

5. Canada to rationalize seats in parliament, ie have the region give up its over-representation

6. A base on which to start building a regional economy

7. A stronger region in the likely event of Quebec separation

[Wilber]

Unite the four provinces into one province with one legislature and one provincial government inside Canada. That allows:

1. Atlantic Canada a larger more unified voice with which to speak in Canada

2. A rationalization and better co-ordination of provincial policies

3. Economic union

4. A region commensurate with other regions in Canada

5. Canada to rationalize seats in parliament, ie have the region give up its over-representation

6. A base on which to start building a regional economy

7. A stronger region in the likely event of Quebec separation

I don't know enough about the regional sensibilities within Atlantic Canada but on the surface, something like that looks like it would have possibilities.

[geoffrey]

Do you realise how many seats 'Atlantica' would lose if they were represented on par with everyone else?

[Mad_Michael]

Do you realise how many seats 'Atlantica' would lose if they were represented on par with everyone else?

Very good point.

We have one riding in Toronto that has one MPP and one MP - with a population larger than the whole of P.E.I. which has 6 MP's, 4 Senators plus an entire freakin' legislature.

Fact is, if Altantic Canada were to merge and have seats assigned on a fair and reasonable basis commesurate with the rest of the country, I suspect they'd lose about half of their MP's and Senators.

A federal vote in Atlantic Canada is worth roughly double what a vote in Southern Ontario is worth.

That being said, I can't imagine how outrageously inefficent it is having all those useless Provincial governments (Nfld, NS, PEI and NB). As far as I'm concerned, the provincial level of government is the worst and least efficient government in Canada to begin with. In this respect, reducing from four to one sounds good. However, given Altantic Canada traditions, I'd say this would be impossible in practice - you will get all of the downsides of merging and won't be permitted to benefit from any of the upsides. Politics will force you to have 4 separate regional departments for everything.

The forced merger of Toronto is illustrative. It is a nightmare and has massively increased costs. Idiot Mike Harris forced it on Toronto ostensibly to 'save money'. Like most other things, Mike Harris didn't have a clue what he was doing and it all turned out wrong - and we are stuck with it.

[Mad_Michael]

Should the provinces of Atlantic Canada unite?

Literature on the forced amalgamation of municpalities, cities or regions (US data) suggests that this would not be efficient.

According to the research literature, amalgamations of political units are only efficient if the resulting amalgamation is more than 100,000 and less than 1 million population. If the amalgamation produces a unit larger than 1 million pop (or less than 100,000), the research suggests that overall costs will rise.

[White Doors]

Amalgamating the maritime provinces makes sense to me. Not sure about NFLD though.

regardless of the loss of seats federally I think this would be an excellent thing to do for the region.

Would this take a consitutional amendment to implement?

[[email protected]]

Do you realise how many seats 'Atlantica' would lose if they were represented on par with everyone else?

Very good point.

We have one riding in Toronto that has one MPP and one MP - with a population larger than the whole of P.E.I. which has 6 MP's, 4 Senators plus an entire freakin' legislature.

Fact is, if Altantic Canada were to merge and have seats assigned on a fair and reasonable basis commesurate with the rest of the country, I suspect they'd lose about half of their MP's and Senators.

A federal vote in Atlantic Canada is worth roughly double what a vote in Southern Ontario is worth.

No. Atlantic Canada would loss a handful so seats. (PEI only has four seats).

Also remember that parliament and the Senate are ineffective. Having one or four or ten seats makes not one bit of difference. Atlantic Canada may be overrepresented by a few seats, what good has it done us? The over representation is just another handout.

That being said, I can't imagine how outrageously inefficent it is having all those useless Provincial governments (Nfld, NS, PEI and NB). As far as I'm concerned, the provincial level of government is the worst and least efficient government in Canada to begin with. In this respect, reducing from four to one sounds good.

Agreed.

[[email protected]]

Amalgamating the maritime provinces makes sense to me. Not sure about NFLD though.

regardless of the loss of seats federally I think this would be an excellent thing to do for the region.

NFLD has much in common with the rest of Atlantic Canada, same people, history, culture by and large. Of all four provinces NFLD is the one that would benefit the most, it is actually slated to have a declining population of the next thirty years.

Would this take a consitutional amendment to implement?

Probably. There is good reason to think that the Federal government would be eager for this type of union.

[Mad_Michael]

Also remember that parliament and the Senate are ineffective.

Please explain how Parliament is ineffective.

I believe it is one of the most powerful and effective institutions in Canada. The Senate is irrelevant so don't bother addressing that.

[[email protected]]

Also remember that parliament and the Senate are ineffective.

Please explain how Parliament is ineffective.

I believe it is one of the most powerful and effective institutions in Canada. The Senate is irrelevant so don't bother addressing that.

The role of Parliament is to restrain and oversee the government. To do that it has to have the power to say no to the government on a routine basis. Currently the PMO/government controls the Parliament thereby stripping it of its power. Therefore it is ineffective.

[Wilber]

Currently the PMO/government controls the Parliament thereby stripping it of its power. Therefore it is ineffective.

PMO/government hasn't stripped Parliament of its power. Parliament has given it away. Winning and personal advancement is more important than holding government accountable.

[[email protected]]

Currently the PMO/government controls the Parliament thereby stripping it of its power. Therefore it is ineffective.

PMO/government hasn't stripped Parliament of its power. Parliament has given it away. Winning and personal advancement is more important than holding government accountable.

Either way Parliament is ineffective. QED

What should we do about it, if anything?

[Charles Anthony]

What should we do about it, if anything?

Separate from the rest of Canada.

[Mad_Michael]

The role of Parliament is to restrain and oversee the government. To do that it has to have the power to say no to the government on a routine basis. Currently the PMO/government controls the Parliament thereby stripping it of its power. Therefore it is ineffective.

This is Canada, not the USA.

Parliament is the government.

Parliament cannot be considered in opposition to the government. That is a purely American notion.

We use the Westminster model here in Canada. A parliamentary vote against any government policy necessates a general election.

And please feel free to explain how, with a minority government in Parliament, the PMO controls everything?

[geoffrey]

Theoretically, the PMO can do whatever it wishes, through orders-in-council. The backlash would be considerable if it were tried though.

[Wilber]

Parliament is the government.

No so. The government is the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It is Parliament's duty to hold the government to account. Unfortunately, to a large degree our system has lost sight of that principle.

We use the Westminster model here in Canada. A parliamentary vote against any government policy necessates a general election.

No it doesn't.

[[email protected]]

Parliament is the government.

No.

The PMO+Cabinet+the civil service form the government/executive. They do the day to day managing of stuff plus prepare policy initiatives for the country.

In theory the parliament is an independent organ that oversees and retrains the government, the government must send its bills to be debated and passed by the parliament, the people's representatives.

In Canada it is easy to get the two confused since the executive has effectively subverted the parliament so it appears as if the parliament is just another 'department' of the government, its effective role is just as a rubber stamp.

Parliament cannot be considered in opposition to the government. That is a purely American notion.

Actually no. Parliament as opposition is its original British role, to oppose the monarch. Centuries of evolution in England saw the parliament eventually become a stopgap against the monarch, especially on taxing and spending. All the taxes the monarch wanted had to ratified by the people's reps.

The Americans refined the system a little, but they did not invent it. It is a purely British notion of government. The Founding Fathers were all Englishmen steeped in English political philosophy.

We use the Westminster model here in Canada.

Yes we do. It is the recent subverted version of the traditional English approach, one that fuses the Executive to the Legislature and betrays the original intent of the sharing power between the Monarch and the Parliament. It is a very poor model and is not worthy of Canadians.

A parliamentary vote against any government policy necessates a general election.

Yes, and again this makes parliament ineffective. The only way to restrain the government on a bill is by precipitating an election? What kind of system is that? The simple approach would be to vote 'no' on a government proposal and get back to business.

And please feel free to explain how, with a minority government in Parliament, the PMO controls everything?

It is true that under a minority government there is a little more restraint on the PMO but still the PMO has vast powers. Majority governments are the norm in Canada and there the PMO operates with virtually no restraint and has complete control over the executive and the legislature.

[Wilber]

The PMO+Cabinet+the civil service form the government/executive. They do the day to day managing of stuff plus prepare policy initiatives for the country.

PM and Cabinet make the policy and define the legislation. They govern the country. The bureaucracy does the day to day management. It is Parliaments job (all of Parliament) to hold both of them accountable.

[Figleaf]

Do you realise how many seats 'Atlantica' would lose if they were represented on par with everyone else?

Very good point.

We have one riding in Toronto that has one MPP and one MP - with a population larger than the whole of P.E.I. which has 6 MP's, 4 Senators plus an entire freakin' legislature.

It's four MPs and four senators.

[Wilber]

Do you realise how many seats 'Atlantica' would lose if they were represented on par with everyone else?

Very good point.

We have one riding in Toronto that has one MPP and one MP - with a population larger than the whole of P.E.I. which has 6 MP's, 4 Senators plus an entire freakin' legislature.

It's four MPs and four senators.

Not unusual. Abbotsford where I live has 11,000 fewer people than PEI and only 1 MP. We do have 2 MLA's though. At the present rate of growth we will have more people than PEI within a couple of years.

[jdobbin]

I don't think it could happen because each province would fight for the capital. There would be massive jobs cuts that it would have everyone up in arms.

PEI would have what? Two MLAs?

The rest of Canada would have something to say as well because there are amendments specific to each province. I doubt that the new province would be able to keep all its senators or MPs.

Still, if there was a demand for it, I'd say go ahead and do it.

I see more of a likelihood of northwestern Ontario becoming part of Manitoba than the Atlantic areas merging as one.

[[email protected]]

I don't think it could happen because each province would fight for the capital. There would be massive jobs cuts that it would have everyone up in arms.

PEI would have what? Two MLAs?

The rest of Canada would have something to say as well because there are amendments specific to each province. I doubt that the new province would be able to keep all its senators or MPs.

Still, if there was a demand for it, I'd say go ahead and do it.

I see more of a likelihood of northwestern Ontario becoming part of Manitoba than the Atlantic areas merging as one.

Not so, Union was discussed in 1864 and likely would have gone ahead except Confederation came along. It has been reexamined periodically since then, most recently in 1970.

Issues such as the capital, number of MLAs etc etc are not really all that important. Especially when faced with the start reality of doing nothing; federal handouts, impoverishment, declining populations, and increasing irrelevance is really not an option.