From: cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: When do we stop being outsiders? (WAS Re: The Journal on ...)
Organization: CSI Dept., University of Ottawa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 14:35:17 GMT

In article <9702@s3.ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>#   >Federal forbids any publishing of documents proving that Quebec
>#   >secession can be done economically.  Last year, C.D.Howe institute
>#   >got a blame for such a document.
>#
># Perhaps because it can't be done economically.  I don't know.  But if Quebec
># did leave, they could definitely take their share of the national debt with
># them.
>#
>We are already paying our share of the federal debt.  I don't see what that
>change and it is thus irrelevant.  But, if federal bannish 
>publication of this kind of documents, this prove that (1) they are
>disturbing the reality to try to prove secession is negative; (2)
>they know they have no real argument to keep Quebec in Canada.

No, there is a BIG change.  You may be paying for your share of the
federal debt right now, through federal taxes.  If Quebec becomes a
separate state, then you will no longer be paying money to the
Canadian federal government, and some adjustment will at that point
become appropriate and NECESSARY.

There is an international formula that can be applied to such a case.
I'm not TOO familiar with the way it would distribute debts, but there
is certainly going to be some allocation, possibly similar to the
following:

Current Situation: (With some made-up numbers.  If anyone can give
better numbers, do so in the framework of making this whole analysis
more correct.  Flames over the appropriateness of my choices will be
redirected to /dev/null.)

Canadian Population:  25million
Quebec:	               7 million (28%)  

Quebec provincial debt:  $30 billion  (Certainly made-up!  Could be
					more, or less!)

Federal debts:          $400 billion  (Not TOO far off!)

The net "Quebec Share" of governmental debts is equal to:
 $30 billion + 28% of $400 million = $142 billion.

In order to equalize things, the new State of Quebec would have to
take on the $30 billion debt of the former Province of Quebec, as well
as $112 billion of the debt of the former State of Canada (with
Quebec).

THIS is what people are talking about when they say "Quebec will have
to take it's share of the national debt."

The numbers may vary, and there are MANY good reasons why the criteria
might be adjusted.  

For instance, one might want to consider whether there have been any
regional disparities in the disposition of that $400 billion national
debt.  Quebec may not have been receiving 28% of the BENEFIT from the
spending that resulted in that $400 B debt.  Maybe tax revenues from
Quebecois were used disproportionately to sponsor job creation
projects in Newfoundland.  Or to fund wheat farmers in Alberta.  Or on
the other hand, Quebec may have received MORE than 28% of the benefits
from the federal government's activities, and would owe more than 28%.

Another reason:  Is population the relevant criteria?  If we are
assuming that democracy is one of the most fundamental values, then it
probably IS the most important criteria.  But then, land area might
really be more relevant.  Or the proportion of federal government
office buildings.  Or something else.

-----

My view overall:

There will be MANY costs, both social, political, and economic if
Quebec separates.  To BOTH Quebec, and "TROC".

A few issues:
- Debt reallocation
- Setting up those services in the Quebec government that are now
    performed by the federal government
i.e.:
  - Setting up a Quebec criminal justice system
  - Unemployment Insurance system
  - The QRTC (the Quebec equivalent to the Canadian Radio & Telecom
    Commission)
- Settling land claims with the Quebec First Nations
- National Defense (The FAQ: les Forces Arm\'{e}(e)s du Qu\'{e}bec?)

These are just a few issues that I can think of over 2 minutes.  All
of them will involve a GREAT deal of cost.  Anyone that thinks that it
is costless is an IDIOT.

That being said, there MAY be some benefits.

1) Quebec and the Federal Govt. would no longer have policy clashes,
which can certainly be costly to BOTH.

(Of course, if the clashes take place because one side is RIGHT, and
the other side is WRONG, then it might be better to fight the issues
out, and finally reach the consensus on what is RIGHT.)

2) There would be fewer levels of government in Quebec.

3) TROC might be able to cut costs, since the French minority would be
much smaller, and could be ignored without there being the kinds of
political repercussions that there are now.  "Official Bilingualism"
might be discontinued, which would cut translation costs.  (Don't
flame ME for this - I just think it likely that this might happen at
the behest of the Western provinces, which would be more powerful in
the smaller Canada, and that don't seem to like French very much.  And
in this case, the benefits would be primarily economic.)


I think that the costs (social, political AND economic - I'm NOT just
talking dollars) would probably outweigh the benefits, and that there
would be further bad effects.

If Quebec is gone, then:
1) Ontario becomes GREATLY more powerful.  The eastern and western
provinces would not be happy about this.  You think Bob Rae doesn't
like equal representation in the Senate now?  Think about how happy he
would be if Quebec leaves, and he's leader of 1/2 of the Canadian
population, and only gets 11% of the Senate seats.  Think about it.

2) Other provinces worry about/gang up on Ontario.
Long term prognosis:  We have 4 "states" in what is now Canada.

A) Quebec.  The "elder" state, founded in 1995.
B) The Federation of Western Provinces, founded in 1998
C) The Confederation of Atlantic Provinces, founded in 2003.
D) The Independent Commonwealth of Canadian Provinces (Ontario)

I don't know what happens to the Territories.
-- 
Christopher Browne
cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca
University of Ottawa
Master of System Science Program
Newsgroups: can.general