HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: marky@engin.umich.edu (Mark Anthony Young)
Subject: Re: European Union
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 18:05:31 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) asks:

>Anyone have the population distribution for these countries?

The following is from the 1987 Canadian World Almanac, estimates for 1985:

  Country     Seats   Population
  -------     -----   ----------
> Germany:      24      61M (west only)
> Italy:        24      57M
> UK:           24      56M
> France:       24      55M
> Spain:        21      39M
> Netherlands:  12      14M
> Belgium:      12      10M
> Grece:        12      10M
> Portugal:     12      10M
> Irland:        9       4M
> Denmark:       9       5M
> Luxembourg:    6        400k

("Seats" here refers to the number of seats each country has on the Economic
and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions in the European Union.)

This was all related to a discussion about representation in the Senate and
the House of Commons, so let's take a look at how this might apply.  If we
multiply the population of each province by six, we get numbers that look very
similar to those above (amazingly similar, actually).  If we'd based our
Senate on this progression, we'd have got more or less the following:

Province       6xPop     Seats   Current   Change
--------       -----     -----   -------   ------
Ontario         55M       24       24         0
Quebec          40M       21       24        -3
BC              17M       12        6        +6
Alberta         14M       12        6        +6
Manitoba         6M        9        6        +3
Saskatchewan     6M        9        6        +3
Nova Scotia      5M        9       10        -1
New Brunswick    4M        9       10        -1
Newfoundland     3M        9        6        +3
PEI               750k     6        4        +2
NWT               300k     6(?)     2
Yukon             125k     6(?)     1

BC is the only province that isn't within 1M of some country mentioned above.
It might have got 15 instead of 12 (but not likely, since we tend to class it
with Alberta in terms of size).  The territories are not full partners in
confederation, so they'd probably have got less.  

Grouping by "regions":

Province       6xPop     Seats   Current   Change  Proposed
--------       -----     -----   -------   ------  --------
Ontario         55M        24       24        0        6
Quebec          40M        21       24       -3        6
West            43M        42       24      +18       24
Atlantic        13M        33       30       +3       24
                          ---      ---                --
                          120      102                60

Quebec goes from nearly one quarter of the Senate seats to about one sixth.
It's still better than the one tenth they get in the current deal, but given
that both the Atlantic and the West would be increasing representation (the
West by a whopping 75%), and Quebec actually decreasing, this would probably
be a hard sell in Quebec (particularly if going to equitable meant adding some
effectiveness--as it would have to to sell in the west).

...mark young
From: robichau@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Benoit Robichaud)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Access to English schools
Date: 10 Sep 92 20:53:34 GMT
Reply-To: robichau@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Benoit Robichaud)
Organization: Universite de Montreal

In article <1992Sep9.134650.14110@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>>>Because I am not accepted as a fully legitimate member of my own
>>>linguistic community; I do not have access to public services that
>>>are available to other people; .......
>> 
>> Because you emmigrated to a FRANCOPHONE province. The anglo-quebecois
>> minority has its privileges (or rights as you like to say). It doesn't
>> mean that all british immigrants are entitled to it.
>
>Why not?
>

Parce que vous etes d'abord et avant tout (au yeux du gouvernement) un
"immigre". Le fait que vous parliez une des langues officielles du
pays (maternellement ou non) ne vous donne pas necessairement le droit
de jouir de certains services (puisque le reglement concernant l'acces 
a l'ecole publique s'appuie justement sur cette distinction 
immigrant/non-immigrant pour trancher).

Vous devriez plutot militer pour ces pauvres francophones hors-
Quebec qui, malheureusement et de moins en moins, parle francais
meme a la maison ... 

J'espere que dans l'eventualite d'un changement a cette loi, vous
continuerai a envoyer vos enfants a l'ecole francaise (puisqu'il
sont maintenant membre d'une communaute bilingue-francophone) et
que contrairement a vous (:-)) il sauront mieux manier cette belle
langue qu'est le francais.

Benoit
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Analyzing the Deal
Date: 9 Sep 92 20:30:51 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

That whole 25% floor is a big flash in the pan (de la poudre aux
yeux).

After years of dealing with Ottawa and the Provinces, it is very clear
that as soon as Quebec share of the population becomes lower than 25%
by only a few percent, there will be a major gang-up to change this.
Remember the "Rep-by-Pop" movement when Upper-Canada's share of the
population finally surpassed Lower-Canada's?

In any case, it will take a quite a while before this happens, so I
don't see what's the big fuss about it. It's just a big scam so
Bourassa doesn't appear to have lost with the representation at the
Senate.


-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: thood@twitus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Analyzing the Deal
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:54:13 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Matrox Ltd.

Mr. Morrison wants decentralization.

Good.  But so long as there is a federal government, the voters who
elect that government should be as equal as possible.

Safeguards for minorities?  Okay.  The Equal, Perhaps-Elected, Slightly-
Effective Senate (EPESE) is just what the doctor ordered.  :-)

--
Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
Montreal
From: wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith)
Subject: Wilson gives Malaysia $$ (by getting in bed with Dom. Textiles?)
Organization: The John P. Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 00:54:43 GMT

(the substance, if not the exact wording of the text below, came from
a Windsor Star (AP) article of 2 Saturdays ago.  The text in parenthesis
is my "running commentary")

Trady Minister Wilson (also minister of industry, science, and technology,
my, he wears many hats, doesn't he?  I bet he will be a well sought-after
consultant in the private sector after the next election.  Let's see what
he's up to now...) on a visit to Malaysia (that's where they have lots of
textile plants'n'things, not unlike some parts of Q-bec) signed an agreement
last Friday to give $4.9 million Cdn over a period of 7 years to a
Malaysian research institute.

(MIER -> Malaysian Institute of Economic Research.  Gee, that's nice.  We're
helping them to understand themselves!)  Anwar-Ibrahim, Malaysia's finance
minister, said the Canadian moola will aid research on the Malaysian
economy (gee, I wonder what else the money will aid?)

Anwar said the assistance started in 1987 (gee, Mike didn't tell us then,
did he?) and with the latest grant, total Canadian International 
Develpoment Agency (you know, the agency that helps smooth the flow of
hidden-agenda-money-for-personal-or-political-gains) assistance to MIER
will reach about $6 million.

Wilson said Malaysian textile (!) exports to Canada are set to increase
as the Canadian gov't considers lowering tariffs for these products.

Wilson said that a subsidiary of Dominion Textiles of Canada would set
up a textile manufacturing plant (ah, now we know that Wilson gets into
bed with Dominion textile blankets, and pays for them with our money)
for markets in east Asia.

Well Mr. Holmes?  Did I come to the correct conclusion?
From: mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew B Englander)
Subject: Supreme Court in the Deal (Was Re: Collective rights in the new
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:59:04 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.214318.13314@thinkage.on.ca> dat@thinkage.on.ca (David Adrien Tanguay) writes:
>thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:
>>Only Quebec judges will be eligible for three Supreme Court positions.
>>Only non-Quebec judges will be eligible for the other six positions.
>
>Is this the case? I thought it was only that there must be 3 judges on the
>supreme court who had been admitted to the bar in Quebec. This would mean
>that they could be currently practising in another province. The criteria
>is expertise with the civil law, and not place of origin. Maybe I'm thinking
>of the July agreement...
>-- 

In practice, almost everyone who's been admitted to the bar of Quebec
currently resides in Quebec. Those who don't are unlikely to be nominated
to the Supreme Court by the Quebec government.

Mathew Englander.

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: "Individual"/"Collective"
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: can
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:12:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.172749.16487@pandora.matrox.com> thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:
>Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian) writes:
>
>>Steele argues that collectivism leads inevitably to separatism, because every
>>collective becomes an enterprise that promotes itself by finding ever more
>>grievances; eventually it has no recourse but splitting off from the larger
>>society.
>
>The article on the front page of the Globe and Mail, 14 September 1992, is
>of interest in this regard (I quote some sentences from the article):
>
>Scientists have invented something called a "cochlear implant"
>which can restore partial hearing to the deaf.
>
>But, some people oppose use of the device.  Gary Malkowski is Canada's first
>deaf parliamentarian, elected to the Ontario legislature for the NDP.
>"There is nothing wrong with being deaf," he says through an interpreter.

True, there is nothing morally wrong, as he is defensively insinuating.
If deaf people do not want to be helped, then fine, but they shouldn't
rule it out for deaf people who do want it.

>"Why bother fixing a deaf person -- especially a child?"  According
>to Malkowski, the deaf have a unique and rich culture complete with
>their own language, values, traditions, and ways of behaving.

This "rich culture" may be a nice adaption, which we can appreciate
for its own sake. It may be true that a child born deaf, and  left
untreated will develope differently, and be untreatable. This
doesn't mean that we should make it mandatory for deaf people
to develop that way, if a remedy exists. Would Malkowski say
that a worker who lost his hearing in an accident must remain
deaf, so he can be part of a "rich culture".
>
>Mr. Malkowski makes no secret of the fact that he opposes cochlear implants
>partly because he fears the devices could threaten deaf culture.

Seems odd to impose a handicap just to preserve a culture.

>
>
>--
>Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
>Montreal


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  Just another "Enemy of Canada"
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  Say NO/NON to Constitutional
 Electrical Engineering                 |  hegemony and fear-mongering
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca                     |  by politicians/scum.
________________________________________|_________________________________
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Where to get the text of the agreement (was Re: The new
Date: 9 Sep 92 13:16:03 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1143

From article <1992Sep9.090751.8644@spxtech.qc.ca>, by steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter):
> We have the following sources:-
> 
>   Globe & Mail, September 1st
> 
>   Ottawa Citizen, September 5th, page B5 (thereabouts)
> 
>   Montreal Gazette, September 5th, pages A6-A7
> 
>   Canada Communications Group
>   47 Clarence Street
>   Ottawa
>   (613) 941-1824 or 1-800-561-1188.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I spoke to "Julie" who also gave me the
address and phone number for the Canada Communications Group
                                 Printing Bureau Building
                                 45 Sacre Coeur Boulevard
                                 Hull
                                 Quebec   K1A 0S0

                                 (819) 956-4802
when I asked her where I could get a full copy of the 1982 accord.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: dat@thinkage.on.ca (David Adrien Tanguay)
Subject: Re: rep by pop
Organization: Thinkage, Ltd.
Distribution: can
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 06:18:05 GMT

nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:
>Nevertheless, Quebec nationalism is a political fact in Canada, and
>cannot be whisked away.  The difficulty in the current constitutional
>discussions is that different people have different (and often
>uncompromising views) of how Canada should be organized, how the
>interests of various groups are to be best represented.  At the
>extreme, this leads us to the attitude:  "Well, if you can't do it my
>way, then I don't want to be a member".  The problem with that attitude
>is that it is divisive - after all, if Canada is broken up into
>independent provinces, the arguments won't stop there, since regions
>will still fight it out.  At the extreme, this attitude leads to a
>wasteland populated by 28 million people, each fiercely defending HIS
>sacred interests and principles.  How far will we get that way?

I think the only real fracture line is around Quebec, so that's as far as
it would go.

Going the other way leads to disbanding Canada and joining the US (further,
but too unrealistic for now, a single world nation).
"Do it the way you're told and be happy!"

If you're not willing to just drop Canada and join the US, for the sake
of a Greater Unity, why not? What line was crossed where you had to decide
"It's not my way. I don't want to be a member of the US."?

Hold your nose and vote for Manifest Destiny!
Hold your nose and vote YES/OUI!                (to the current deal)

I prefer to breathe freely.
-- 
David Tanguay       dat@Thinkage.on.ca  dat@Thinkage.com  uunet!thinkage!dat
Thinkage, Ltd.           Kitchener, Ontario, Canada          [43.40N 80.47W]
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: mfrappie@csi.uottawa.ca (Marc Frappier)
Subject: Re: Analyzing the Deal
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Distribution: can
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 13:00:16 GMT

In article <14893@mindlink.bc.ca> Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian) writes:
>Comments on THE DEAL!!!

- the definition of distinct society has been reduced so much it does not mean
anything now.  The Canada clause will precede.  (See comments from 8 experts
in le Devoir, sept 4).  Bill 101 will certainly be under attack again,
reopening the most difficult issue to deal with in Quebec. (Robert Libman
accepts this deal for this reason mainly).

- no real new powers, no limitation of federal spending in provincial
jurisdictions (except for "co-financed" programs, which is only a portion)

- vague definition of aboriginal right to self-government, issue to be solved
in court if not resolved within 5 years.

- symbolic but undemocratic institution like EEE senate.

- Bourassa negociated this deal in a regressive mode. 25 % guaranteed share of
seats is not democratic.  Partners in confederation will have very good reasons
to renegociate this in the future if Quebec falls under 25 %.  Also, vetos
granted to everybody will lock the constitution evolution for a very long time.

How can I vote yes to this?  By "lassitude" only.

-- 
Marc Frappier				| e-mail: mfrappie@csi.uottawa.ca
Department of Computer Science          |
University of Ottawa                    | phone : (613) 564-9232
Ottawa, Canada, K1N 6N5                 | fax   : (613) 564-9486
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Balance of power in Quebec of tomorrow
Date: 7 Sep 92 12:55:33 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1292

From article <1992Sep7.044324.13693@pandora.matrox.com>, by thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood):
> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
> 
>>The Balance, of Power. :-)
>>That's what I want to see.
> 
> You are quite insane, you know.  The Equality Party will never have the
> balance of power because the Liberals and the P.Q. would form a coalition
> to prevent it.  For you, it would be a bit of power for a struggling
> minority, but for the French, it would be the return of the colonial era.
> You'd see an anti-English reaction that you can hardly imagine now.
> I'm telling you this in all seriousness.  Don't pretend that this
> is a normal democracy.  I think you should read up in the nationalist
> literature to disabuse yourself of any notion that a party associated
> with the English could dictate policy.
> 

I think you may be right about that.

It is worth a shot, though, even if it only gives the English community
a more representative voice in the assembly.
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: The new agreement
Date: 6 Sep 92 14:25:17 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 845

From article <14861@mindlink.bc.ca>, by Walter_Gorlitz@mindlink.bc.ca (Walter Gorlitz):
> I would like to read the entire text of the agreement before I vote on it.
> Does anyone have a copy of it?  I would like a copy of it E-Mailed to me (at
> the first address below).  If it's not too long or too inappropriate perhaps
> posting it here as well.
> --
>              Signature?  I'm a Mac user, why do I need a signature?
>   wgorlitz@wiz.wimsey.bc.ca        walter gorlitz        a416@mindlink.bc.ca


Page A6-A7 of saturday's Gazette.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
From: warkent@ltisun14.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Analyzing the Deal
Date: 11 Sep 92 11:38:37 GMT
Reply-To: warkent@ltisun.epfl.ch
Distribution: can
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne

In article <1992Sep10.225736.10384@thinkage.on.ca>, dat@thinkage.on.ca (David Adrien Tanguay) writes:
|> If the agreement passes, I would prefer that Canada does break up.

Better dead than red.
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: L'invention d'une minorite
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:54:47 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <1992Sep14.203912.19239@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>>Is Francois trying to suggest that "individual" rights are not
>>legitimate?
>
>He would probably like to suggest that supposed "individual"
>anglophone rights are invalid because they're merely a way to
>"legitimize" collective anglophone complaints.

I'm not saying they are "invalid": I'm saying that they are trying to
make them into "superior", or more basic or essential rights
(individual rights normally refers to things like food, clothes,
decent housing, no-racism, etc.) and to make the rights of the
francophones (as a society) into "lesser" rights (some even go as far
as treating it as an instrument of oppression).

-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: michele@catnix.UUCP (Michele Simond)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Access to English schools
Date: 12 Sep 92 02:52:31 GMT
	<CLAMEN.92Sep8162159@BYRON.SP.CS.CMU.EDU> <12808@audetf>
        <CLAMEN.92Sep9194025@BYRON.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>
Organization: Rhinoceros, chargez!

clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen) writes :
>
> And returning to my previous post, I always thought it was the case
> that there were some bilingual (French-German, German-Romanche)
> cantons in Switzerland.  Perhaps Michelle can enlighten us.

I know of two French-German cantons (Valais and Fribourg), and I
believe that the canton of Grisons is Romanche-German.  But
I don't know anything about what it implies in terms of schooling
rights and general political life.  But I will ask someone from
my family who was born in Valais (who BTW does not know more then 3
words in German!)



--
Michele Simond ...... Traductrice ......  B.P.: michele@catnix.UUCP
(514) 671-8820				   OU :	michele%catnix@cam.org

La Liberte n'est pas une marque de yogourt.
Xref: sparky can.politics:6462 soc.culture.canada:6308