From: cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Plan S -- Quebec separation
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 19:30:07 GMT

In article <schuck.720947110@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>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.

... Other "not-so-nice actions" omitted...
>
>>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.

"Kind compared to Hitler" doesn't actually mean kindness...  Canada
can probably do better than other countries.  We don't have the
_hatred_ here that exists in Serbia/Croatia/Yugoslavia.  The point is
not that we should consider how OTHERS have dealt with secesion - it
is that we should figure out how CANADA should deal with it.

>>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.

So how about the people that live in Shawville Quebec?  Most of 'em
are English; most of them voted "YES."  THEY didn't do ANYTHING to
encourage the secession movement - and are likely to strongly oppose
it.

Many of them may have CANADIAN passports, and have always been
citizens of CANADA.  And because people in Montreal start a secession
movement, you'd propose making "loyalists" into refugees?

This sort of action is likely to elicit hatred from EVERYONE in
Quebec.  Legitimate hatred.  Hatred that's likely to STRENGTHEN any
secession movement.

>>  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.

A "seceding" province is not yet a separate nation.  This sort of
action would only lend the secession MORE legitimacy, in that it would
result in injustices against Canadian citizens.

>>   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.

Refusing to trade with an independent Quebec would COST a lot.

Seeing an independent Quebec "go down the tubes" right next door would
COST a lot.

We've seen over the past few years that Canada's economy is strongly
tied to the US economy; if the US economy is depressed, ours will be
too.  It would be very similar with an independent Quebec (with the
difference that their successes/failures would be of somewhat less
effect than that of the much larger US economy).

If, due to a "cruel and ruthless" deal, Quebec is reduced to chaos,
that chaos would have an effect on Canada, and most particularly, on
the Eastern provinces.

I suppose that as someone several thousand miles away, you can feel
that it doesn't matter what happens to Ontario and the Atlantic
provinces.  There wouldn't be any mobs heading into BC - they would
have to go through Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta first.

And the fallout would come in EVERY area.  Political, economic,
social, and the list goes on.

>>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.

And if this puts out of business all of the people that do business
between Quebec and other provinces?  That's a good thing?

>Why buy goods and services from a secessionist province when people
>need jobs in the provinces that remain?

Because if we don't, there won't be any way for people in Quebec to
buy goods and services from the non-secessionist provinces.

Because if we don't, some Americans will buy the goods and services,
and sell them to us at a markup.

Because it won't move the jobs from Quebec to anywhere else - it'll
just mean that people in BOTH places are unemployed.

Because we can charge hefty duties on those goods.  (Which come to
think of it, won't actually benefit anybody other than the bureaucrats
in Ottawa.  Bad idea.)

I'm NOT suggesting that there be any sort of blank cheque given to
seceders.  That's hardly reasonable.  "Transfer payments" would
certainly not go to Quebec anymore.  But the timing of that should NOT
be determined with "ruthlessness" as the primary factor.

What I AM suggesting is that:
a) Vindictiveness should have NO part in the equation.

When people are looking for revenge, they tend to do things that are
fairly stupid.  There's a saying about "cutting off your nose just to
spite your face."

b) It is NOT obvious that "punishing" Quebec for seceding actually
provides benefit to the rest of Canada.

Doing "ruthless" things to Quebec may FEEL wonderful at the time.  But
if it winds up hurting the Canadian economy, that's an expensive
feeling.

You can claim that it will have little effect on BC - it would just
hurt the Eastern provinces.  Unfortunately, what hurts the East will
be a hurt to "Canada Mk II".  And BC is part of that.  If the East
gets hurt economically, and BC doesn't, then transfer payments start
heading from BC to (say) Ontario.  THAT isn't good for BC.

-- 
Christopher Browne                |     PGP 2.0 key available
cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca           |===================================
University of Ottawa              |  The Personal Computer:  Colt 45
Master of System Science Program  |  of the Information Frontier
Newsgroups: can.politics