From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Plan S -- Quebec separation
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 07:05:10 GMT

clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen) writes:

>In article <schuck.720843872@sfu.ca> schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) writes:

>   The only way to treat a seceding Province is to cut off all funds
>   flowing from Ottawa and the Provinces immediately.

>   At no time must Ottawa or any other province subsidize a secessionist
>   Province. Once a vote on Secession is announced or a secessionist
>   Party is elected with a mandate to secede, all monies flowing into the
>   secessionist province must be cut off until the secessionist province
>   votes not to secede, or votes out of Power the secessionist government.

>   All trade with a secessionist Province must also be cut off until the
>   terms of secession are decided upon.

>   All MP's from a secessionist province must be removed from office
>   immediately.

>   All Supreme Court Judges from a secessionist province must be removed
>   from the bench.

>   All Senators from a secessionist Province must be removed from office.

>   All citizens of a secessionist Province must be removed from
>   sensitive posts or posts where the terms of secession can be
>   influenced.

>I fail to see the legal or moral justification for any of these
>measures.  Until a secessionist province DECLARES its sovereignty (as
>opposed to calling a vote on sovereignty), it is no less part of the
>country than any other part.  

Moral justification? I think I was being kind considering the way most
countries treat the parts of their countries that try to secede
illegally.

There is *no* legal mechanism in the BNA Act or Constitution for
secession.

>For that matter, even following a
>declaration of sovereignty, individual citizens of that province have
>not necessarily forfeited their citizenship in the country.

Nonsense. Those born in a secessionist province would have to apply
for Canadian citizenship just like any other immigrant or refugee.

>  While the
>political representatives of that seceding province (ie. MPs and
>Senators) have lost their mandate to represent the province at the
>federal level, those appointed to federal posts as Canadians
>could/should not be removed unless/until Canada has revoked their
>Canadian citizenship.

They wouldn't be citizens of Canada. They might be citizens of the
secessionist province. It is absured to think the Supreme Court would
have an ounce of legitimacy with citizens of a secessionist province
sitting on the bench. The same goes for *all* other posts in
government or crown corporations.

>   Finally, the terms of secession must be negotiated by a staff of
>   professional negotiators with no record of working or living in the
>   secessionist province, and their mandate must be ruthlessness.

>So you would prefer negotiators who are more interesting in 'cruelly
>punishing' the secessionist province than coming up with the most
>beneficial deal for the remainder of Canada?

The most beneficial deal for Canada is the one that costs the least
and benefits the remaining provinces the most.

>Introducing a concept of dual loyalty is intriguing.  Perhaps you
>should eliminate anyone who has friends or relatives in the
>secessionist province as well?

By eliminate do you mean kill? I hope not.

I think Canada should separate peacefully, but I think there should be
almost zero relations with the secessionist province until
relationships with our trading partners and political allies are
stabilized.

Why buy goods and services from a secessionist province when people
need jobs in the provinces that remain?
-- 
============================================================================
"We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin                  schuck@sfu.ca
============================================================================
Newsgroups: can.politics