it's part of the ongoing and neverending quibbling about the francophone identity.  actually harper and the main opposition parties pulled a bit of a fast one on the pq.  they had a resolution that essentially said nothing with any kind of legal weight to it to undercut an upcoming pq motion.  this has now essentially blown up in the gov't face with the pq gleefully fanning the flames.

basically a long time back the british should have absorbed the french when they took canada and while it would have been stressful at the time they would certainly have saved us a vast amount of hassling since.

quebec wants all the shiny bits of being independant without any of the costs or inconveniences of actually being inconvenient.  should a federal gov't ever grow a set and actually explain to the people of quebec the actual costs and consequences of real independance i expect you would see a vast quiet on the entire subject appear very quickly.

I wonder if the Quebecois have considered the resistance they might get from those tribes.  Native tribes won't be taking any crap from Anglos anymore, some tribes in the US get out guns, dynamite and morters when there is a dispute over cigarrette taxes with the state.

The Quebec reality is far from what you are saying. I will come back to the forum to expain it but for now, I must go.  By the way, were do you (Ehran) come from?

i'm from manitoba originally and lived on the west coast these last 20 odd years.

 

i'd be interested to find out what i'm so far wrong about. 

link

Ehran, why do you assume that they would take on some of Canadas national debt (fair enough), but not maintain their share of the free trade agreement (not fair)?

 

 

the free trade agreement for example is between canada the us and mexico now.  i do not think quebec would automatically be a part of that nor any other agreements or treaties that canada was party to.  they may well join nafta after their separation but they would have to do so as the nation of quebec.  they would also no longer be part of the auto pact which i think would in short order put paid to there being any cars made in quebec anymore.  i expect that any attempts to join nafta would result in a thorough screwing by us trade negotiators and there is no chance the americans would ever let quebec into the autopact.

 

the people of quebec have been systematically lied to by the pq about the glories of independance lite while the federal gov't has stood around with their thumb up their butt for fear of offending the liberal party's supporters in quebec. 

 

you talk to a quebec resident and start asking the "well what about" questions and it's quite an eyeopening experience for them.

I estimate that the motion recognizing Quebec as a nation does not have any legal consequence. It is however highly symbolic and very important for the people of Quebec. I even estimate that it will slow down the souverainist movement in Quebec. It is interesting to note here that the United Kingdom has adopt the same strategy with Wales.  

This said, as opposed to what Ehran claims, the territory of Quebec is not divisible. The international law recognizes only the secession of territory having already well defined borders. Quebec has definite borders. The minorities which live there do not have any. There is thus extremely to bet that Quebec would keep the integrality of its territory in the event of secession.  

I also inform you that the minorities living in Quebec are the best treated in Canada. They have their schools, their hospitals, etc. The Canadian civil servant for the official languages of Canada already mentioned this several time. As for the autochtones, they have signed several agreements with Quebec in economic matter and takes part for a long time in the development of the natural richnesses of Quebec. I thus do not see which would be the advantage of the autochtones to put at back Quebec. It also should not be forgotten that the autochtones of Quebec are only approximately 50000 on a total population of 7000000. It is also interesting to note that at the time of the last summit of the people autochtones of Quebec which took place in September 2006, the government of Canada was strongly criticized for her inaction whereas the government of Quebec was greeted for the efforts which it makes towards the autochtones.  

Concerning the Québec economy, it depends especially on the United States and very little of the remainder of Canada. Economic reprisals coming from Canada following a secession of Quebec would have very little impact thus. The remainder of Canada and in particular Ontario do not may find it beneficial besides to play this play because several of their goods are sold in Quebec. I think for example of all the cars of Ontario which are sold in Quebec or of all the Ontarian trade which pass through the St-Laurent River. In addition, all the Québécer experts in taxation (separatists and federalists) agree for saying that there exists in Canada an unfavourable tax imbalance unfavorable for Quebec. Then Ehran, stop saying that people of Quebec are buggers. They do nothing but assert equity. Also note that all the separatist leaders have affirmed that sovereign Quebec would pay its share of the Canadian debt. Will Canada give 25% of their goods paid by Quebecer?

Concerning the free trade agreement, it should be known that Quebec has of it signatory like all the other Canadian provinces. That rises from the principles of international law.

Concerning the "car pact", you should know that this pact favours only Ontario because it is only in this place that cars are built. I would even say that this pact is unfavorable for Canadian because they are in the obligation to buy cars from Ontario which are much more expensive than those available in the USA.

 I would finally like to ask Ehran what would be Canada without the Québec and its French tradition?

Okay, so Quebec becomes a separate nation.  What becomes of the Maritimes?  They will be cut off from the rest of Canada.  Can they stay attached?  Do they become part of the US?  Their own country? 

The Maritimes can continue to be part of Canada. You don't need to be adjacent to a country to be part of it. Take the example of Hawaï which belonging to USA or all former french or british colonies that were belonging to France or GB. There is a big gap beetween them.