« Duceppe and the EU example | Main | The Wonderfulosity of Cheese, Part 3: Romano-Asiago Death Match »

December 17, 2005

Comments

Eugene Plawiuk

For my views on a new federalism see my article on A new Canadian Federalism,
http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2005/04/bankruptcy-of-liberal-federalism.html
as well as my article on The Western reform movement....Rebel Yell
http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2005/07/rebel-yell.html

These pieces you are writing are excellent. I would say though as I do in my blog articles that the optimum would be to reconsititute confederation, go to the source of the problem, which English Canadian chauvenists declare is 1795 when in reality it is the Great Con--of Federation 1867 that Papineau realised and spoke out against.

Mandos

Those are interesting articles Eugene but I think that I'm not really convinced of the solution you propose because I think that the ideas behind that solution, however positive and desirable, are precluded by a number of other factors. You'll notice that one of the main themes I've been harping on lately is the difficulty/undesirability of "intermediate" solutions. Ultimately, under present conditions, the federal government is going to need a pouvoir de dépenser or some equivalent. To have something different, you'd have to reconstitute our entire politics and economics from scratch...which I support in principle.

I'm glad you are enjoying my writing. Makes me glad to know that someone other than Craig reads me :)

Ian Welsh

Oh I read you. I just don't have much to say on Quebec separatism that is useful. I grew up out West and their attitude is pretty much "make up your bloody mind. We're tired of blackmail."

I just don't see a way that will resolve it for all time. What the separatists seem to want is unacceptable to too many of the other provinces and to oridinary Canadian citizens. Stephen Harper was right about one thing - the entire establishment swung very clearly behind Meech Lake and it was still defeated.

So what do we do? Neither side is willing to give on the important issues, so there's no point in opening negotiations. Besides, who can you negotiate with?

I will say this - if I was serious about making an attempt, I would make an offer and ignore the Provincial government. I would take it directly to a provincial referendum and then if I got approval on that use that as the will of the people and amend the Constitution on that basis.

Not legal, no. But it would be legitimate, if you see the difference.

Mandos

Oh I read you. I just don't have much to say on Quebec separatism that is useful. I grew up out West and their attitude is pretty much "make up your bloody mind. We're tired of blackmail."
I was born out West myself and was raised there but moved to Ottawa when I was still quite small. I still have family and friends there and visit it periodically. Nevertheless I did absorb an understanding of the perspective of the West even though I'm not sympathetic to its current incarnation.

In fact, I'm going to write about the West-Quebec seesaw. In fact, I'm gradually building up to it.

I just don't see a way that will resolve it for all time. What the separatists seem to want is unacceptable to too many of the other provinces and to oridinary Canadian citizens. Stephen Harper was right about one thing - the entire establishment swung very clearly behind Meech Lake and it was still defeated.

What Quebec nationalists want is based on a misapprehension of what the ROC has become. That's a post that has to happen before I talk about the West-Quebec dichotomy.

The comments to this entry are closed.