From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Canadian Federalism
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 07:08:38 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.031656.20297@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>In article <1992Nov7.063536.18845@ee.ubc.ca> jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:
>>
>>The things that provinces would agree to, if they are sensible, are:
>>
>>- a common defense and foreign policy
>>  This way, Canada would remain large, and strong enough to carry more weight
>>  than the provinces could alone. BC , Ontario or Quebec etc are viable on
>>  their own, but if we pull together, we have more clout.
>>
>
>Why do provinces have all these foreign missions, and why does Quebec
>want a separate seat at the Francophonie.  The premiers would never
>agree to this.


They have trade missions in strategic markets. But if they don't
agree to it, that doesn't matter! That's the whole point. I
am proposing rebuilding Canada from the ground up, with no pre-conceived
notions. If some provinces don't like it, that's their choice, and they
don't have to join a "new" Canada.

The problem is you are still thinking in the old mindset of federal
politics, where the PM and federal government orcehstrates the antagonism
between provinces to keep its own power.


>The provinces don't negotiate this way...they oppose strongly everything
>you have proposed...where have you been for the last ten years.


Try reading the goddam article, instead of picking out the starting
pints I suggested (which were only meant to illustrate the starting points
for discussion)


Let me spell it out more clearly for you:

- the federal government is removed from the picture
- all powers devolve to the provinces. Canada is effectively
  dismantled for a day
- the next day the premieres negotiate just how far they want to
  go in creating a united Canada.
- any province that doesn't like the outcome can choose to remain
  out of Canada


It's plainly obvious that under this framework, no province can claim
it was cheated out of anything it had. 

It is much different when you negotiate with all of your assets and power
intact; than if you try and negotiate when your assets have been traded
away (as is  it will always be with the current system), plus the Federal
governement is in the middle playing the provinces against each other, so
it can retain power for itself.

The resulting Canada would be a confederation where the central governement
exists only to serve the needs that the provinces have delegated, instead of
the wishes that the current Federal government tries to impose 
(like the National Energy Policy, like Quebec alienation, Meech, 
constitutional bickering, all evil in general :-)  etc.)

>
>>This is the opposite of where (as now) power originates from
>>the top (prime minister and cabinet) and trickles down. A similar structure
>>should exist within provinces, where cities and muncipalities delegate to
>>the provincial govt, instead of dictating to them. To borrow from H Ross
>>Perot, do you want a government that comes at you or from you?
>>
>
>Gerald
>
-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: can.politics