From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: PLAN B
Keywords: referendum alternative proposal
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 13:13:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep25.231243.17837@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> breton@McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Pierre Breton) writes:
>
>>Canada would last about 15 minutes under this proposal...for
>>one...BC and Alberta would opt out of everything and keep their
>>tax dollars at home and form their own country.   When you
>>accept federalism, you accept the notion that the whole is
>>greater than the sum of the parts.           
>
>If Canada would last about 15 minutes under this proposal... then 
>Canada would last about 15 minutes under the "Charlottetown Deal"...

I have been saying as much...that Charlottetown is a recipe for
disintegration...with inertia and initial conditions the main 
reason the unravelling will occur over decades rather than in
15 minutes.

>The "Charlottetown Deal" contains these two opt-out clauses.  There
>is perhaps some ambiguity in the expression "full compensation".  I 
>take for granted that the compensation is to be DETERMINED BY 
>NEGOCIATION.  The federal government establishes the goals of the 
>program and as the role of verifying if the programmes set-up by the
>opting-out provinces  meet their goals.  
>

The Politburo decides the goals of the program...not the federal
government.

>Within a federation, in general, I believe what amounts to a fair 
>compensation corresponds to the amount dedicated to the program 
>times the fraction of the population that the province correspond.  
>For a "have not" province, this amount should gradually decrease to 
>the amount it puts in the federation as the province opts-out of 
>more and more programs or take over jurisdictions.  
>

But this is not the type of compensation or equalization we've
agreed too.  Charlottetown will condemn us to eternal provincial fighting
over compensation and equalization...these tensions are diffused
in the current constitution because the money could flow via
competing streams from through the provinces to individuals and
to individuals directly.  Charlottetown limits the federal
ability to ease interprovincial bickering by constricting the
ability of the federal government to transfer resources to
individuals directly and forces the flow of money through
provinces, which means the provinces and Canadians will become
increasingly tribal...and our common citizenship frittered
away.

>>The rest of the country is not going to financially support
>>what amounts to an independent Quebec, so when you propose
>>an extreme asymmetrical model of federation or sovereignty,
>>don't build in transfers from the "have" provinces...
>>
>>Equalization is dead with significant asymmetry or independence.
>>
>
>Quebec does not intend to become a parasite and I can not imagine
>how the other provinces could accept this situation.  I could say 
>the same of any other province.  
>

The unlimited ability to opt out with full compensation implies
equalization...and doesn't imply a common citizenship which
recognizes that the collective whole is more than the sum of the parts.

>Note that the structure I propose could evolve peacefully toward 
>this extreme asymmetrical model of federation, but the regional VETO
>should give people the assurance that they are better served by the 
>federal government.  
>

There would be no federal government...as there will ultimately
be none under Charlottetown, because they accept "tribalism" and
fail to simultaneously recognize the greater community and the
individual...both of which are essential for a common country.

Europe is struggling to achieve this sense of greater community
and sense of the individual out of a "tribal" past...under
Charlottetown, we are embracing a new "tribalism" at the expense
of the individual and the greater community.

Gerald

Newsgroups: can.politics