From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Analyzing the Deal
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 06:25:45 GMT

In article <kkaTqB2w164w@ham.almanac.bc.ca> emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca writes:
>
>>Gee, when you put it THAT way, the deal's just irresistable!
>
>No, it's not. Voting yes is the lesser of two evils. 

Why should I as a BCer accept any evils? Quebec knows what it wants, and isn't
prepared to swallow a load of crap. From this end of the country, it is
very hard to convince myself that Quebecers are dancing in the streets
over this "deal". And even in BC, it looks IFy. Well, we'll all know
come October.

(you're probably from Ontario anyway, just a transplant British Columbian.
even if you ARE, you probably don't appreciate the "distinctive society"
we have out here. I think BC has as much to lose in a weak deal as Quebec
does. Quebec's prepared to face things on its own, even if that involves
hardship. I don't feel any differently)

>It has been two years since Meech, and in case YOU haven't noticed, Quebec 
>is ON it's way to independence. Or did you think October 26 is just 
>for show? 

I have noticed. What's your point? The rest of Canada should drop 
everything just to save Quebec? Why should I be prepared to sacrifice my
future in BC, any more than those in Quebec?


I don't believe the breakup of Canada would benefit anyone. Even in
Quebec, they could would gain control of their future, but at great
burden. This would be OK if there were no alternative, but I think there
is a viable alternative.

This is at least the second time we face Canada seperating because of
Quebec. How does the rest of Canada react? They come up with a patchwork
quilt which barely pleases anyone. We don't need a constitution that 
just covers up the cracks. We need to start from scratch, and work
out what will truly satisfy each province.

If we can't or won't do this, then we shouldn't be surprised if Quebec
gets impatient, and wants out. If Quebec isn't really restless enough
to leave, then we should be practical, and leave things alone. Chipping
away at things will just bring the whole house down.

Basically, my view is: do it right, or not at all. I can put up with things
as they are. But don't waste our time with incomplete "solutions".

Prelimanary polls suggest we've done a half baked job: there is a good 
chance of a NO vote in Quebec. If it does pass, I bet it'll be out of
fear. Is that what we aspire to? fear? Anyway, I strongly suspect that
Bourrassa probably sold out Quebec for his own short term political
interests. Quebecers" correct me if I'm wrong.

If politicians are going to mess with the constitution, they'd better put
their short term self-interest aside, and put their province first.
>>
>You may have the illusion that Quebec is of no economic importance to B.C. 
>It's just that - an illusion. We're not just talking inter-provincial
>trade here, either. Don't you know what the dissolution of Canada - and 
>the economic uncertainty the break-up will bring - will do to the value
>of the Canadian dollar? And do you realize what interest rates will
>have to be pushed to keep investment in Canada? And what that will do to 
>businesses, jobs and borrowers evrywhere in Canada? WHAT THE HELL 
>DO YOU MEAN "IT CAN'T HURT" !!


It can't hurt because that kind of talk is politcal pandering to our
worst fears. The politicians are using these issues to make us approve
a constitutional deal under duress. Through the sovereignty referendum,
through Meech, stockmarkets barely took notice. Should Quebec leave,
it would take months if not years of negotiation to settle things.
No doubt Canada would have lesser international standing. But interest rates
would only rise if there is a perceived threat to foreign capital.
There isn't much synergy between our economies that would cause less
growth if there were a total breakup.
The foreign markets have seen this all before and know that Canada vs
Canada/Quebec would largely be a politcal formality, a change of title.

IF you believe all this shameless fear-mongering and doomsaying, then
you've been duped. CAnada did not self destruct after Meech. Either way,
Canada will not self destruct on OCt 26th. With Yugoslavia, Somalia, 
Cambodia, Iraq etc in the world, Canada's problems are laughable in
comparison, and international magazines snicker at Canada's endless
bickering.
>
>No, it's not. As you'll eventually find out, life is a sequence of
>compromises.

compromises are for car dealers. Don't ask me to write the word 
compromise next to words like justice, equality, indivual rights.

The constitution is the basis for our country. While we may compromise
on day to day issues in a democracy, we don't call into question
certain basic principles. If we don't spell out what those basic principles,
are, then we won't have a sound basis for our political institutions.

Example: if we agree in the principle that everyone is equal, and that
our votes are equal, then the rest of the constitution shouldn't contradict
that. If that one *basic, simple* principle is dealt away, even if
it's a remote possibility that Quebec's population ever goes below
25%, that is still wrong! It is not a matter of picking a lesser evil.

If politicians can't even stay honest to the most basic things, then
what hope is there? The correct response is to say NO, this goes against
my own, and everyone else's set of ideals. NOT: how much lower do you
want me to sink? There has to be a line where you say: I'm not backing 
down.

>
>emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca  (Robert Smits, Ladysmith B.C.)
-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  Just another "Enemy of Canada"
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  Say NO/NON to Constitutional
 Electrical Engineering                 |  hegomony and fear-mongering
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca                     |  by politicians/scum.
________________________________________|_________________________________