Quebec should pursue independence from Canada

Quebec independence has in recent months increasingly come under scrutiny as a viable political option for the people of Quebec. This is in large part to the recent massive defeat of the main pro-sovereignty party of Quebec, the PQ, as well as polls showing that the movement is increasingly being abandoned by younger Quebecois. The question can be raised as to whether this movement is viable as a political option. I hope to explore with my opponent the pros and cons of this movement.I will take the con position and argue as to why the Quebecois should no longer pursue independence.First, allow me to concede two points.1) The Quebecois form a cohesive group who view themselves as a people or nation in the sociocultural sense. This has also been recognized by the Canadian government through a motion in the house of commons in 2006. 2) A group who are popularly recognized as a nation have a face valid basis to form a state. This is neither necessary or sufficient to justify nationhood but does offer a preliminary ground to form a state.However, the fact that the Quebecois could form a state does not mean they should. The basis of my argument is that a nation should not seek to form an independent state if on the whole it makes its members worse off in doing so. I believe Quebec would be worse of as an independent state for 5 reasons.1) Loss of federal transfers: Currently Quebec is a net beneficiary of the Canadian federal system of redistribution of wealth between provinces. Even if Quebec saved money by recouping taxes sent to Ottawa and by eliminating redundancies, most neutral economists agree that Quebec receives more than it sends.2) Debt: Quebec is already indebted quite heavily as a province of Canada. However as an independent state, it would likely inherit a sizable chunk of the federal debt too. This would be in a climate of political instability that could make managing the public debt considerably harder.3) Loss of political influence: Quebec has, at several points, had considerable influence on Canada (consider the number of prime ministers from the province) and as a result, been able to use Canadian influence to promote its interests. An independent Quebec, while more autonomous, would also be more irrelevant as it would be relatively small, and live in the shadow of the US and English Canada.4) Reduction in civil rights: The quebecois independence movement defines itself largely in contrast to the individualism of the "Anglo" tradition and is hostile to classical liberalism. These tensions are based on the desire of major figures in the movement to use state power to compel assimilation into the majority culture. For example, major strands of the movement have proposed increasing laws to restrict the use of English and/or the ability of unilingual angolphones to function in Quebec. They have also proposed laws restricting religious expression for minority groups. Within Canada, these options are blocked by the constitutional charter of rights. However, an independent Quebec could choose to write the constitution so that individual rights are more limited. Such a move would lead Quebec to adopt a more coercive stance. This would be harmful to the image of the Quebecois nation as well as to the well-beings of its minorities.5) Loss of cultural wealth: The most important reason why Quebec should not separate is that the entire history of the Quebecois people has been based on exchange with other cultures. This people arose out of interactions between French's settlers and natives, then with waves of immigrants (British loyalists, Irish refugees, later waves of immigrants). This process has led to increased creativity and dynamism within Quebec. I propose that participation in Canada provides more contact with outside perspectives and that an independent Quebec would simply be much more insular, and in the long run, less creative and dynamic as a cultural group.I welcome your approach and enjoy reading your opening statements with an open mind.