Newsgroups: can.politics
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Plan S -- Quebec separation
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:12:23 GMT

Timothy D. Webster (tdwebste@sparta.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
>In article <1992Nov5.171020.25030@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>>
>>Countries trade because it benefits them to do so. Should in the future
>>Quebec separate I would expect CSQ to immediately attempt to negotiate a
>>mutually beneficial trade arrangement (along with a multitude of other
>>things); and in the meantime I would hope that some sort of interim measure
>>would be taken, e.g., apply the terms of the FTA to CSQ-Quebec trade. Yes,
>>there would be a lot of hard feelings after a Quebec separation; but I
>>don't see how it is in anyone's interest to initiate a trade embargo or
>>war.

[the last bit above should read: "but I don't see how it is in anyone's
interest to initiate a trade embargo or *trade* war". Another poster
thought I was referring to the shooting kind]

>With all due respect you have forgotten the human factor. Economically
>Canada is rough shape. As case in point, Canada's credit rating is now
>done from AAA to AA. Quebec has been threatening separation for sometime
>now. In affect holding CSQ hostage. Who is everyone going to blame if
>Canada fails? Answer Quebec. Separation or the breakup of Canada is NOT
>going to be smooth. 

This true. But I am hoping that should Quebec leave, CSQ's politicians will
do the right thing and not give in to those that scream for blood. Instead
they will put the interests of CSQ first and explain why cutting off one's
nose to spite one's face is not terribly brilliant. Indeed, as soon as
Ontarians came to realize the enormous trade that goes on between their
province and Quebec, and came to the conclusion that messing with that
trade would create a great deal of dishevel, then a reasonably rational
approach to negotiations should come about.

Perhaps I'm being optimistic, but the alternative seems so petty and short
sighted that I have a hard time believing that we would see it.

>Instead lets all work for a more productive tomorrow. (Efficient Economy)
>There is no reason for Quebec to separate from Canada for cultural
>reasons. The only justifibiable reason for separation is economic or
>military. Case in point, look what is happening in Europe. The European
>countries do not share a common culture. They are however uniting for
>economic and military reasons. Thus Canada should stay united.

This is how you see it, and this is how I see it. But, it seems that the
Quebecois see it differently. All of what has gone on in the past (CA,
Meech, etc) has been because of culture and language. For reasons that they
can better explain, many Quebecois feel that their culture and language are
in danger as long as Quebec is a part of Canada as just another province.
One could argue that this feeling is more from the heart than the head, but
in the end that feeling is still there and all the economic efficiency in
the world would probably not change it.

I wish I had something positive to say at this point, but I don't. Quebec
and CHQ seem to have two very different views on Quebec's role in
confederation, and it is not at all obvious to me how much longer it is
possible for all the parties involved to continue to politely ignore this
state of affairs.
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson

Newsgroups: can.politics