[mylesmalley]

Vid, I wish more people in this country had your level of perspective.

[1ajs]

How?

There are no good jobs there unless the reserve is located near a mine (and discriminatory practises prevent the native people working in those mines from moving up the ladder--they never train people from reserves to be managers or supervisors) or has found some sort of creative niche (like a fly-in resort). Not all reserves have the luxury of being located near cities. In many cases, these communities are hundreds of kilometres from the next community. Their economies do not work in the same way ours do. You can't expect them to. As much as you hate to admit it, they have a lot in common with impoverished parts of Africa in that their economies are almost purely subsistence.

In addition to that, many of them lack proper educations. (Some communities don't even have schools or clinics, the most notable being Attawapiskat, where the government has repeatedly refused to build a school that isn't located on a toxic site.) They live in third world conditions (Tuberculosis rates on reserves are seven times higher due to overcrowding. The average home on a reserve houses about 6 people, compared to just over 2 for a house in a city) Many communities lack drinking water and sewage treatment. Many isolated reserves run on large diesel generators. (Rankin Inlet's generator broke down a few winters ago; the water pipes, which are overground due to permafrost, couldn't be heated, they all froze, and the entire community of over 2,000 had to be evacuated.) They're not allowed to own their properties. (Unlike in our cities, where you can buy and own a house, native people on reserves cannot own their properties. They must rent them from the government. Most other buildings are built by contract work from the south. They have little pride in what buildings exist, because they didn't build them and they don't own them.) I could go on.



You don't think they're trying? First Nations here in Northern Ontario are constantly coming up with plans to solve their problems. Government regulations (mostly from the Indian Act) keep preventing them. Canadian and Provincial laws are always skewed against them, and even when the government tries to include them in creating laws, like Ontario recently did with its Mining Act overhaul, it puts little weight on their concerns.

As much as the government assists them, it restricts them. You can't throw money at them and expect them to solve anything. (In many cases, windfall profits on reserves have made problems worse.)



And my last point--the government structure of some bands is demagogic. In many cases, members of these reserves really do have to beg their band leaders for welfare cheques and housing. In some communities, such as Fort William First Nation several years ago (a relatively prosperous reserve located beside a city of 120,000 people) where the band council made people up to get welfare money, there is extreme corruption. The problem here is that welfare isn't given to members of a reserve individually--the band government gets a lump sum and divides it among the population! It's just like African aid. The government almost always takes a disproportionately high cut of the money, whether it deserves any of that money or not. Reserves typically have several large families or family groups and it isn't uncommon for feuds to form between them, causing more problems at the government level. (See Peguis First Nation's recent political controversy.) The whole government structure of First Nations is flawed because the Canadian and Provincial governments don't give it the malleability to evolve away from these issues. Aboriginal people also lack a functioning justice system. How are they going to bring people do justice if they lack the ability to even do that? Many First Nations don't even have police! Of all detachments operated by Nishnawbe-aski Police, only one building meets building codes! Most have buckets for toilets. The jail in Kashechewan burned down, and because the cell was just built out of scrap, it couldn't be opened and the inmates burned to death. And these are the conditions that police on reserves have to deal with! That's the good job!

There are a lot of reserves with progressive councils that can do amazing things with what little resources they have, but you can't except every one to be like that. There is no real support for these people. We simply throw money at their problems and grandstand to win votes from urban people.

Canada literally has a third world nation in its back yard. About 80% of our land mass and 1% of our population is third world. Complaining that "they're lazy and should get off their asses and get good jobs" does absolutely nothing to solve these problems.
vid turn that into a letter that you can mail to every MP and to all of the big meadia people and native leaders

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

How?

There are no good jobs there unless the reserve is located near a mine (and discriminatory practises prevent the native people working in those mines from moving up the ladder--they never train people from reserves to be managers or supervisors) or has found some sort of creative niche (like a fly-in resort). Not all reserves have the luxury of being located near cities. In many cases, these communities are hundreds of kilometres from the next community. Their economies do not work in the same way ours do. You can't expect them to. As much as you hate to admit it, they have a lot in common with impoverished parts of Africa in that their economies are almost purely subsistence.

In addition to that, many of them lack proper educations. (Some communities don't even have schools or clinics, the most notable being Attawapiskat, where the government has repeatedly refused to build a school that isn't located on a toxic site.) They live in third world conditions (Tuberculosis rates on reserves are seven times higher due to overcrowding. The average home on a reserve houses about 6 people, compared to just over 2 for a house in a city) Many communities lack drinking water and sewage treatment. Many isolated reserves run on large diesel generators. (Rankin Inlet's generator broke down a few winters ago; the water pipes, which are overground due to permafrost, couldn't be heated, they all froze, and the entire community of over 2,000 had to be evacuated.) They're not allowed to own their properties. (Unlike in our cities, where you can buy and own a house, native people on reserves cannot own their properties. They must rent them from the government. Most other buildings are built by contract work from the south. They have little pride in what buildings exist, because they didn't build them and they don't own them.) I could go on.



You don't think they're trying? First Nations here in Northern Ontario are constantly coming up with plans to solve their problems. Government regulations (mostly from the Indian Act) keep preventing them. Canadian and Provincial laws are always skewed against them, and even when the government tries to include them in creating laws, like Ontario recently did with its Mining Act overhaul, it puts little weight on their concerns.

As much as the government assists them, it restricts them. You can't throw money at them and expect them to solve anything. (In many cases, windfall profits on reserves have made problems worse.)



And my last point--the government structure of some bands is demagogic. In many cases, members of these reserves really do have to beg their band leaders for welfare cheques and housing. In some communities, such as Fort William First Nation several years ago (a relatively prosperous reserve located beside a city of 120,000 people) where the band council made people up to get welfare money, there is extreme corruption. The problem here is that welfare isn't given to members of a reserve individually--the band government gets a lump sum and divides it among the population! It's just like African aid. The government almost always takes a disproportionately high cut of the money, whether it deserves any of that money or not. Reserves typically have several large families or family groups and it isn't uncommon for feuds to form between them, causing more problems at the government level. (See Peguis First Nation's recent political controversy.) The whole government structure of First Nations is flawed because the Canadian and Provincial governments don't give it the malleability to evolve away from these issues. Aboriginal people also lack a functioning justice system. How are they going to bring people do justice if they lack the ability to even do that? Many First Nations don't even have police! Of all detachments operated by Nishnawbe-aski Police, only one building meets building codes! Most have buckets for toilets. The jail in Kashechewan burned down, and because the cell was just built out of scrap, it couldn't be opened and the inmates burned to death. And these are the conditions that police on reserves have to deal with! That's the good job!

There are a lot of reserves with progressive councils that can do amazing things with what little resources they have, but you can't except every one to be like that. There is no real support for these people. We simply throw money at their problems and grandstand to win votes from urban people.

Canada literally has a third world nation in its back yard. About 80% of our land mass and 1% of our population is third world. Complaining that "they're lazy and should get off their asses and get good jobs" does absolutely nothing to solve these problems.

Excellent post, dude.

However, I think waht Canadian_Mind was trying to say/take issue with was the corruption by band leaders such as those you mentioned. Also, while there certainly are Natives actively trying to improve their situation, there are those who are content to do nothing and just collect welfare.

it shames me as a Canadian that more people pay attention to such an "issue" as the seal hunt, when a much larger problem involving people living in our country exists. It's a travesty.

[Canadian Mind]

Jesus dude, you can't just go out in Nunavut and get a job at safeways, either you go hunt or you work for the gvt either way there aren't enough jobs in the north for everybody and not enough dwellings, resulting in shameful living conditions (which i've seen for myself). Now this is not because they're lazy, you try coming out in -50 every morning to hunt polar bears and seals and come home to a small flat with 4 families living there.

I haven't seen what it's liek up north, so my bad for not specifying where I meant.

I've lived in BC and Alberta, and now Ontario. The only truely deplorable reserve I have ever seen was in northern Alberta on our way to Slave Lake. The rest were located within reasonable distance of established communities.

Regardless, pardon my ignorance.



Vid, if government regs are fucking them over so badly, and the reserves so spread out, why not give them a choice to ditch the current laws as they are under the indian act and integrate with the rest of society? I know that forcing them too would be a catastrophe, history has already prooven than. But couldn't the opinon be given to them as they come of age?

Something where once they reach the age of 16-18, if they have highschool education, the government will pay for half their tuition, half their books, half their living costs, etc. They have to cover the other half. Possibly include giving up the different rights they have under the Indian Act.

For those that don't have highschool education, offer to pay full room and board while they complete highschool, or have them do schooling by correspondance in their reserve, and once that is compelted, give them the same opportunity as the ones who already graduated highschool?



Regardless, fucking excellent perspective. Getting ripped to shreds by you was enlightening. Why the hell aren't you in government?

[1ajs]

Excellent post, dude.

However, I think waht Canadian_Mind was trying to say/take issue with was the corruption by band leaders such as those you mentioned. Also, while there certainly are Natives actively trying to improve their situation, there are those who are content to do nothing and just collect welfare.

it shames me as a Canadian that more people pay attention to such an "issue" as the seal hunt, when a much larger problem involving people living in our country exists. It's a travesty.
yea theres those that could give a rats ass but also something i have observed is many of these people have no idea about the programs out there for them to succeed they call me a bullshitter when i tell them about whats out there for programs

[Waterlooson]

When I have a chance I'll make up some sort of graph(s) with the historical populations I have.

For now, here's something I hadn't actually looked at very closely. We focus on CMAs a lot but these are the populations of urban areas as defined by Statistics Canada. Basically these are populations for continuous urban areas, not counting nearby towns and exurbs separated by some distance like CMAs do.




rank Urban Area 2006 2001 growth% area km2 Density, 2006
1 Toronto (Ont.) 4753120 4375899 8.6 1748.57 2718.3
2 Montreal (Que.) 3316615 3161967 4.9 1676.62 1978.15
3 Vancouver (B.C.) 1953252 1834849 6.5 1135.61 1720
4 Calgary (Alta.) 988079 879252 12.4 704.46 1402.6
5 Edmonton (Alta.) 862544 782163 10.3 854.51 1009.4
6 Ottawa-Gatineau (Q/O) 860928 834799 3.1 512.29 1680.55
7 Quebec (Que.) 659545 635512 3.8 670.1 984.24
8 Hamilton (Ont.) 647634 620232 4.4 367.32 1763.13
9 Winnipeg (Man.) 641483 626956 2.3 448.92 1428.96
10 Kitchener (Ont.) 422514 387319 9.1 313.85 1346.22
11 London (Ont.) 353069 337866 4.5 218.04 1619.25
12 St.Cath-Niagara (Ont.) 308596 299950 2.9 382.68 806.41
13 Victoria (B.C.) 304683 288697 5.5 275.57 1105.64
14 Halifax (N.S.) 282924 276412 2.4 262.65 1077.2
15 Windsor (Ont.) 278765 265540 5 176.05 1583.46
16 Oshawa (Ont.) 269734 242831 11.1 162.48 1660.14
17 Saskatoon (Sask.) 202425 196811 2.9 149.56 1353.49
18 Regina (Sask.) 179246 178225 0.6 118.87 1507.9
19 Barrie (Ont.) 157501 129963 21.2 171.52 918.25
20 St. John's (N.L.) 151322 147378 2.7 182.62 828.61







Some have wondered about how long it would take Vancouver to exceed Montreal's population if we were to project into the future using the stats (growth rates and population figures) listed above. According to my calculations... it will take Vancouver 168 years to be larger than Montreal (in pop.).... but interestingly, it will only take Calgary 84 years to exceed Montreal's population!

[Wooster]

Some have wondered about how long it would take Vancouver to exceed Montreal's population if we were to project into the future using the stats (growth rates and population figures) listed above. According to my calculations... it will take Vancouver 168 years to be larger than Montreal (in pop.).... but interestingly, it will only take Calgary 84 years to exceed Montreal's population!

#2 here we come, bitches! ;)

[ue]

Why is Québec such low density compared to others?

[Alexcaban]

Some have wondered about how long it would take Vancouver to exceed Montreal's population if we were to project into the future using the stats (growth rates and population figures) listed above. According to my calculations... it will take Vancouver 168 years to be larger than Montreal (in pop.).... but interestingly, it will only take Calgary 84 years to exceed Montreal's population!

You people are not thinking properly about this topic, yes Calgary and Vancouver could overtake Montreal based on the growth rates but it will never happen because the population in Montreal goes up as well and changes rates every year just like any other city in Canada. Yes Calgary went through a boom but it wont forever at this rate you are calculating Calgary could even overtake Toronto at some point.

[LeftCoaster]

I don't think anyone is being too serious right now...

[WhipperSnapper]

Yes Calgary went through a boom but it wont forever

I don't know ... they can eventually afford to buy and import a Great Lake.

[LeftCoaster]

Why would they do that when they could go one step better and get some real ocean? ;)

[ue]

I don't think anyone is being too serious right now...

i was about my question two up from yours ( :shrug:.

[Reesonov]

Why would they do that when they could go one step better and get some real ocean? ;)

If you're suggesting that Alberta pipe in some of that ball shrinking ice water from Vancouver, you are crazy. I'm thinking some sort of oil for Caribbean Sea water, barrel for barrel, deal with Belize.

[Waterlooson]

You people are not thinking properly about this topic, yes Calgary and Vancouver could overtake Montreal based on the growth rates but it will never happen because the population in Montreal goes up as well and changes rates every year just like any other city in Canada. Yes Calgary went through a boom but it wont forever at this rate you are calculating Calgary could even overtake Toronto at some point.

1) Now where did I say that either Calgary or Vancouver will ever exceed the population of Montreal? Nowhere.

2) Of course my calculations included the fact that Montreal is growing every year... not just Calgary.

3) You don't know what the future population rates will be for any of these cities either. It could turn out that the future differential between Montreal's and Calgary's growth rates actually increases. That is very possible. You have to realize that circa 1950 Calgary's pop. was only around 150,000... today, it's around 1.2 million.... Who would have believed that would happen only 59 years ago?

Everyone understands that growth rates change every year, but to believe that Calgary can't maintain high growth rates because the economy has slowed suggests a lack of knowledge about Calgary's population growth history. I also think you are being optimistic about Montreal's future growth. I recall a billboard in Waterloo posted about 40 years ago... it said that Waterloo was the 2nd fastest growing city in Canada... the fastest was Calgary... perhaps the more things change the more they really do stay the same?

Bottom line... the only one not thinking correctly is you!

[Waterlooson]

BTW... I forgot to mention that Barrie will exceed Montreal's population (if growth rates are maintained) in only 97 years. ;)

Actually, if anyone would have suggested a hundred years ago that Calgary would exceed Winnipeg's pop. before the century was out, they would also have been laughed at.

[MolsonExport]

Why is Québec such low density compared to others?

Outside of the very dense and beautiful core, it is sprawlsville-de-Quebec. QC has the most 'impressive' network of freeways for its size, hands-down in Canada.

http://maps.nrcan.gc.ca/topo101/images/021l.jpg
source: Natural Resources Canada webpage.

[ue]

Thanks I didn't know. I always associated it with the vibrant core and thought how could it be sprawly, granted I did see the freeways but I just thought well every city (in NA) has freeways.

[Acajack]

Outside of the very dense and beautiful core, it is sprawlsville-de-Quebec. QC has the most 'impressive' network of freeways for its size, hands-down in Canada.

http://maps.nrcan.gc.ca/topo101/images/021l.jpg
source: Natural Resources Canada webpage.

This is largely the result of the 2002 merger of all of Quebec City's sprawling suburbs with the central city. The pre-merger central city there was a much denser municipality, and might have been one of the most dense (if not the most dense) in all of Canada.

MolsonExport is absolutely right about the freeway system there - it is astounding when one considers the size of the metro area.

[NetMapel]

Outside of the very dense and beautiful core, it is sprawlsville-de-Quebec. QC has the most 'impressive' network of freeways for its size, hands-down in Canada.

http://maps.nrcan.gc.ca/topo101/images/021l.jpg
source: Natural Resources Canada webpage.

I think I see more freeways in that picture than all of Vancouver region...

[Acajack]

I think I see more freeways in that picture than all of Vancouver region...

Though Quebec City probably does have more freeways than Greater Vancouver, I was looking at the map above and it is a bit misleading. Not everything that appears as a double line is a freeway. For example, the two roads found under the letters S and y in Sillery, which are the Boulevard Laurier/Chemin St-Louis/Grande-Allée stretch for the S (provincial Route 175) and Boulevard Champlain (provincial Route 138) for the y, are not freeways at all but arterial roads with alternating stretches with and without medians.

The following link gives a better idea of the freeways (in blue):
http://www.reseaumateriauxquebec.ca/pps2005/images/carte-autoroutes%20vers%20quebec1_7x7.jpg

Now, this only gives the picture on the north shore of the St. Lawrence. On the south shore, the A-73 extends southwards towards St-Georges-de-Beauce, and there is also the east-west A-20 that crosses the south shore suburbs like Lévis, Lauzon, Charny, Bernières, St-Nicolas, etc. on its routing between Montreal and Rivière-du-Loup.

[miketoronto]

Quebec is interesting because eventhough it is a small city, they seem to have built this huge modern suburban downtown in St. Foy.

So Central St. Foy is more of the centre of the region in many situations for shopping and business, than the old town and "real" downtown.

I think Quebec City is the only Canadian city that operates express commuter bus service to a suburban downtown in large numbers. Almost every sector of Greater Quebec has direct express bus service to St. Foy and to the old "downtown Quebec".

[kool maudit]

quebec is not that small -- to listen to canadian tourists, you'd think it was fredricton.

the overall region probably has about a million people, and the city region has like 700,000.

meanwhile, calgary is spoken of as if it is chicago...

[MrOilers]

On top of the inadequate health care and education, far too many Northern communities don't even have access to clean drinking water it's embarrassing. A lot of towns, some with a thousand people, don't even have water or sewer systems. The Federal government (yes, even the Harper government) has acknowledged this problem and has been spending hundreds of millions every year, just to bring these people clean water, which is a basic human right accrding to the United Nations, to provide these communities with a way to provide them with something to combat the issues with basic health and hygiene.

Canada also made it into the World Vision donation catalogue a couple of years ago - for only a $30 donation you can feed a Canadian family:

https://catalogue.worldvision.ca/Gifts/Forms/Gift.aspx?giftId=2519

It's difficult to even fathom that this is happening in our country, which is one of the world's wealthiest.

[Fmarotte]

quebec is not that small -- to listen to canadian tourists, you'd think it was fredricton.

the overall region probably has about a million people, and the city region has like 700,000.

meanwhile, calgary is spoken of as if it is chicago...

As someone who use to live south of quebec city I can tell you calgary is a way bigger city than quebec, more urban, quebec is a nice city, but not a big one.

[ue]

quebec is not that small -- to listen to canadian tourists, you'd think it was fredricton.

the overall region probably has about a million people, and the city region has like 700,000.

meanwhile, calgary is spoken of as if it is chicago...

that's quite true. québec is not too small on the canadian scale, although it's usually left out of national discussions (much like edmonton, ottawa, and winnipeg but on a less scale...québec is more left out), but not as big as say vancouver or calgary. it's around the size of winnipeg i'd say, which isn't small in canada.

[vid]

Vid, I wish more people in this country had your level of perspective.

Me too.

Vid, if government regs are fucking them over so badly, and the reserves so spread out, why not give them a choice to ditch the current laws as they are under the indian act and integrate with the rest of society?

I know that forcing them too would be a catastrophe, history has already prooven than. But couldn't the opinon be given to them as they come of age?

Something where once they reach the age of 16-18, if they have highschool education, the government will pay for half their tuition, half their books, half their living costs, etc. They have to cover the other half. Possibly include giving up the different rights they have under the Indian Act.

For those that don't have highschool education, offer to pay full room and board while they complete highschool, or have them do schooling by correspondance in their reserve, and once that is compelted, give them the same opportunity as the ones who already graduated highschool?

They have that choice. Lots of native people have moved to cities and made lives here and kept many aspects of their heritage intact while doing so. But this is the only way they can get away from the Indian Act. Any native person living on a reserve or who is a member of a band or a Status Indian is subject to that act and to the treaty covering the land where they were born (at least in this region). They can give up these rights (they used to have to if they wanted to vote) but while they gain some rights, the lose others. (They aren't really a second class of citizens; more of a parallel class with slightly different rights.)

Many native youth do go to cities for education. There is a high school in Thunder Bay operated by Nishnawbe-aski Nation that teaches students from an aboriginal perspective. For many of its students, this is the first time they have ever been to a community with more than a few hundred people. They have to take courses to learn how to use supermarkets, board city buses, walk safely on sidewalks and cross streets and so on, because these are new concepts to them. They frequently have to stay with foster families, as well. Many reserves own large houses in the city where students can live while they're away but some reserves lack these, and others don't have enough room for all the students.

They do have the option to leave their communities whenever they want, to pursue whatever they want to pursue. Every Canadian does. But why should they have to leave their communities to pursue these opportunities, when they can be educated in their own communities or at least their own region? It is possible if the government gets its priorities straight and works with these communities and their governments.

As for funding, Aboriginals are about to lose the free post-secondary education, it will be replaced with the loan system currently used for low income people. The poverty faced by aboriginal people however is far worse than what we see in non-aboriginal communities. Someone who lives in poverty in a city is probably doing a lot better than someone who lives in poverty in a rural area or on a reserve.

I believe post-secondary education (including trades apprenticeships), being so crucial to getting decent employment in today's economy, should be free to all Canadians. Instead of removing the rights of aboriginals to a free education, that right should be expanded to non-aboriginals. Not every reserve should have a university or college, but there should be a university or college campus in the region to support them. Unlike every other country that extends its land to the arctic, Canada lacks a university in the north. Many countries have more than one, and in regions with less people. You don't need to have 200,000 people concentrated in a small area with a single large campus for a university to work with today's technology. Many people in Northern Ontario already receive educations through a programme called Contact North, where education is provided by teachers in urban centres to students in remote areas via the internet. They communicate with televisions and camera, and are able to interact through technology. This enables native people to stay in their communities and receive educations. We should take advantage of this.

While there are people in those communities who don't make much of an effort to make something of themselves, there is no reason for the people who do want to have an education to leave those communities. We need educated people there. We can't take them away!

Why the hell aren't you in government?

To get into government, you have to suck up and lie to the idiots that are responsible for choosing you. I'm really bad at that. It's also hard to win the votes of white people when your main agenda is bettering the lives of a minority that most don't understand. Low income people, especially aboriginals, are too apathetic to the political process, so you can't really count on them for support. They have very little faith in the government at any level. There are many exceptions, but generally, most native people and poor people don't vote, which is a large part of their problems going unheard. It is easy for a government to ignore more of their problems or to only make token gestures and smile for a camera without facing severe repercussions. Even a case like Ipperwash isn't enough to bring their issues into the spotlight on a provincial or national stage long enough to see real solutions for them. It's been 15 years since Dudley George was killed and we're only just now getting around to giving that land back to the Ojibwe band that controlled it before WWII.

yea theres those that could give a rats ass but also something i have observed is many of these people have no idea about the programs out there for them to succeed they call me a bullshitter when i tell them about whats out there for programs

That's another problem with our government. There isn't enough effort put into telling people what programmes it offers, so too few people use those programmes and they disappear, whether or not they worked. The language barrier in many aboriginal communities is also a factor. If the government only advertises its programmes in English and French, how is someone who speaks only Cree going to understand it? Unlike languages like Chinese and German, these languages have always been here. It would be unreasonable for us to ignore them. There are more than 100,000 Cree speakers in Canada. In Northwestern Ontario, Ojibwe, Cree and Oji-Cree are the second largest language after English. (While they're three technically separate language, there is a great amount of mutual intelligibility between them.) In much of Kenora District, that is the language that people use. The government should recognize this. In Ontario overall it's a tiny amount of people, but in Northern Ontario, they make up about 20% of our population.

[gammell]

There are no good jobs there unless the reserve is located near a mine (and discriminatory practises prevent the native people working in those mines from moving up the ladder--they never train people from reserves to be managers or supervisors) or has found some sort of creative niche (like a fly-in resort). Not all reserves have the luxury of being located near cities. In many cases, these communities are hundreds of kilometres from the next community. Their economies do not work in the same way ours do. You can't expect them to. As much as you hate to admit it, they have a lot in common with impoverished parts of Africa in that their economies are almost purely subsistence.
Honest question here: What value does the Reserve system have practically and/or potentially? It seems to me if reserves are inherently economically nonviable then they have no chance to sustain a quality of life comparable to the rest of Canada. Inevitably they would continuously slide into a national ghetto clumsily propped up by welfare infusions. Would it not be better to do away with the flawed foundations and try again? Am I missing something?

[Acajack]

Honest question here: What value does the Reserve system have practically and/or potentially? It seems to me if reserves are inherently economically nonviable then they have no chance to sustain a quality of life comparable to the rest of Canada. Inevitably they would continuously slide into a national ghetto clumsily propped up by welfare infusions. Would it not be better to do away with the flawed foundations and try again? Am I missing something?

Not saying this is what you are suggesting, but there has to be something better than just encouraging aboriginals to move to larger (non-aboriginal) urban centres, as this is in most cases a recipe for cultural extinction.
Some form of *true* self-government or autonomy perhaps…

[PPAR]

quebec is not that small -- to listen to canadian tourists, you'd think it was fredricton.

the overall region probably has about a million people, and the city region has like 700,000.

meanwhile, calgary is spoken of as if it is chicago...

...As for the isolation, we all know Alberta IS isolated ....

It always amazes me how the Quebec forum members still have a 1970s image of the West. The Vancouver- Calgary- Edmonton triangle is similar in geographic area to Southern Quebec, and now has a population of 8 million, this compares to Quebec's current population of 7.5 million. It really does not seem too isolated to me (I moved from Ontario 7 years ago).
An interesting aside, Calgary's population is currently about the same as Vancouver's was in the early '70s.

[vid]

Honest question here: What value does the Reserve system have practically and/or potentially?

It gives them a place to live, and it gives them something to invest in. If they were able to own their land, they would have wealth. It also gives them a place to have their own government, their own education system, their own justice system, and so on.

It seems to me if reserves are inherently economically nonviable then they have no chance to sustain a quality of life comparable to the rest of Canada. Inevitably they would continuously slide into a national ghetto clumsily propped up by welfare infusions.

What difference is there between Pickle Lake and Pickle Crow? One is a white community and one is a reserve. One allows its residents to own their land, the other can not.

Would it not be better to do away with the flawed foundations and try again? Am I missing something?

It is something I have thought about before but now, I think it would be better to build on what we have. Give them the ability to create a future instead of leaving them dependent on government handouts. If they could own their land, they (and we) could invest in it. If investment in their land is possible and benefits them, they will be viable. Because they cannot do this today, they are not viable. It isn't them making their communities unviable. It's Canada's archaic laws. Many communities are doing everything they can to prosper. Why not open up our laws so that they can do more?

It always amazes me how the Quebec forum members still have a 1970s image of the West. The Vancouver- Calgary- Edmonton triangle is similar in geographic area to Southern Quebec, and now has a population of 8 million, this compares to Quebec's current population of 7.5 million. It really does not seem too isolated to me (I moved from Ontario 7 years ago).
An interesting aside, Calgary's population is currently about the same as Vancouver's was in the early '70s.

The Vancouver-Calgary-Edmonton triangle has one obstacle southern Quebec doesn have: Mountain ranges.

[bikegypsy]

The Vancouver- Calgary- Edmonton triangle is similar in geographic area to Southern Quebec, and now has a population of 8 million, this compares to Quebec's current population of 7.5 million.

Ok, that's like comparing apples and pencils... the geographic similarities between these 2 regions can be summed up by "they both have trees". I will assume that you meant demographics, which is the study of population. There also your argument doesn't do much. I think what you mean to say is that the total area of both BC and Alberta, is demographically similar to the province of Quebec because they both have more or less the same amount of people. Ok, there you are correct.

But the Vancouver-Calgary-Edmonton triangle is nothing like the demographics in respect to the density experienced in southern and western quebec, namely, the corridor that stretches from Ottawa to Quebec city. Ottawa+burbs (1.5m), Montreal +burbs (3.5), Quebec city+burbs (800000), and the people between these cities (1m) for a total 6.8m just in that tiny piece of land (about 50 kms wide and 600 long). Now, what is the total area between Van, Cal, and Ed? Cmon... Alberta is huge but has only a little more than 3m.

In Quebec, people just don't talk much about western Canada... if we do, we mostly talk about Vancouver. What I'm trying to say is that most Quebecers don't keep track of the demographic changes in western Canada. After all, are you interested in changes in Nova Scotia? or Ontario? Probably not even in Manitoba? People are usually interested only in their own stories. The image that most people have here is the one given by the travel industry... it's the same that the Japanese tourist gets. Western Canada= great mountains, beautiful rivers, wild bears, the great outdoors in general, cowboys (sorry), oil wells, the port of Vancouver and chinatown.

Now, when it comes to forumers here, we tend to be more knowledgeable of others, but not so much.

[raggedy13]

Cmon... Alberta is huge but has only a little more than 3m.

I don't want to get involved in this debate but I just thought I'd point out that Alberta's population is now closer to 4 million than it is to 3 million... 3,632,483. It's growing fast, that's for sure.

Source: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/090326/t090326a2-eng.htm

---------------------------------------------------------
Using the above source I thought I would make this comparison just for fun:

BC: 4,419,974
AB: 3,632,483

BC+AB: 8,052,457
Land Area: 1,567,503 km2
Ave. Density: 5.14 people/km2

PQ: 7,782,561
Land Area: 1,365,128 km2
Ave. Density: 5.70 people/km2

[Martin Mtl]

It always amazes me how the Quebec forum members still have a 1970s image of the West. The Vancouver- Calgary- Edmonton triangle is similar in geographic area to Southern Quebec, and now has a population of 8 million, this compares to Quebec's current population of 7.5 million. It really does not seem too isolated to me (I moved from Ontario 7 years ago).
An interesting aside, Calgary's population is currently about the same as Vancouver's was in the early '70s.

If you want to play that game, you would have have to add the OTTAWA region to the Montreal/Quebec City region. The result is a much smaller aera with a larger population. Sorry.

[MolsonExport]

It always amazes me how the Quebec forum members still have a 1970s image of the West. The Vancouver- Calgary- Edmonton triangle is similar in geographic area to Southern Quebec, and now has a population of 8 million, this compares to Quebec's current population of 7.5 million. It really does not seem too isolated to me (I moved from Ontario 7 years ago).
An interesting aside, Calgary's population is currently about the same as Vancouver's was in the early '70s.


There is a big difference.

http://www.canadainfolink.ca/DensityMap2001.jpg

Yes, I know that it goes back to 2001, but the population densities outside of the large centres are relatively stable. Having lived in BC, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec, there is a huge difference between the "triangle" and Southern Quebec.

[harls]

Isolated in the sense that the western US is sparsely populated compared to the eastern seaboard... I think that's what he was getting at.

[wild wild west]

Ok, that's like comparing apples and pencils... the geographic similarities between these 2 regions can be summed up by "they both have trees". I will assume that you meant demographics, which is the study of population. There also your argument doesn't do much. I think what you mean to say is that the total area of both BC and Alberta, is demographically similar to the province of Quebec because they both have more or less the same amount of people. Ok, there you are correct.

But the Vancouver-Calgary-Edmonton triangle is nothing like the demographics in respect to the density experienced in southern and western quebec, namely, the corridor that stretches from Ottawa to Quebec city. Ottawa+burbs (1.5m), Montreal +burbs (3.5), Quebec city+burbs (800000), and the people between these cities (1m) for a total 6.8m just in that tiny piece of land (about 50 kms wide and 600 long). Now, what is the total area between Van, Cal, and Ed? Cmon... Alberta is huge but has only a little more than 3m.

I agree with your overall assessment but selective use of statistics doesn't help your case. Ottawa=1.2m. Quebec=720,000. Alberta= 3.6 million.

Anyways, there is no debate, the West is obviously still sparsely populated compared to the Quebec-Windsor corridor, notwithstanding our rapidly increasing population and economic growth. While we now have big cities, the space between them is quite massive and sparsely inhabited, with the exception of the Calgary-Edmonton corridor (and if we ignore international borders, Vancouver-Seattle). Rural lands surrounding the big cities is not as densely inhabited, and we do not have the many small cities and towns within close proximity that Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal do. The map MolsonExport posted illustrates it well.

[Acajack]

quebec is not that small -- to listen to canadian tourists, you'd think it was fredricton.

the overall region probably has about a million people, and the city region has like 700,000.

meanwhile, calgary is spoken of as if it is chicago...

Quebec City is overlooked/ignored/thought of as smaller than it is by people in the “rest of Canada” simply because most people in the ROC don’t know anyone who lives there.

I grew up in Ottawa for the most part, and in the 1980s interestingly enough my family and friends always found that Quebec City “felt” bigger than the Ottawa-Hull area did. QC had an NHL team, better nightlife and festivals, better shopping and restaurants, better-dressed and better-looking people, more impressive highways, more impressive recreational facilities (amusement parks, waterparks), the most popular TV show in French-speaking Canada was set there (Lance et compte - short-live as He Shoots, He Scores in English), etc.

Ottawa, though already a larger metro than QC at that time, just seemed very boring and small-townish in comparison. Especially to a teenager or young adult.

Now, what I said was a reflection of the old days, and today I would say that Ottawa has grown in size and also grown up, and feels just as big (even quite a bit bigger I would suggest) than Quebec City.

[kool maudit]

the new canada -- as featured in things like the globe and mail and maclean's -- is a sort of young, boisterous, english-speaking country whose easternmost city is ottawa (there might be a few islands off that coast with lobsters and stuff. we're not sure.)

with my parents in los angeles and a lot of my work/social contacts in the tri-state area i hardly go to canada anymore, which sort of sucks... but it's slipping off my radar and there's a yawning montreal-shaped hole in it anyway. this western thing may be making us sort of pastless.

(that said: i'm in toronto tomorrow and will be doing some recon. all the above can't put a dent in my half-closeted love of toronto.)

[Nicko999]

BC+AB: 8,052,457
Land Area: 1,567,503 km2
Ave. Density: 5.14 people/km2

PQ: 7,782,561
Land Area: 1,365,128 km2
Ave. Density: 5.70 people/km2

We were more talking about Southern Quebec. Everyone knows nobody lives in Northern Quebec

Southern Ontario's density: around 86.47 people/km2
Southern Quebec' density: around 50 people/km2(being generous by including cities that are not in Southern Quebec)

[kool maudit]

i know the west has to be all bold and frontiersy and future-oriented, but to my eastern eyes this numbers juggling seems really ahistorical. southwestern quebec and the ottawa valley are not prominent to me because of how many people live in a certain number of square miles, they're prominent because they're the central locus of canada's founding history. the country came into being here - drafted in ottawa and financed from saint james street.

the legal, cultural and financial underpinnings of the canadian national project (which is now free to branch off into whatever new things it pleases) came from this region. it's hard to think of these sorts of things, maybe, when you are surrounded by ancient towering mountains and ski chalet-looking frozen yogurt stores but from my desk in montreal's old port it all still seems sort of real, so forgive me.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h103/everfresh111/18847.jpg

[Rico Rommheim]

i know the west has to be all bold and frontiersy and future-oriented, but to my eastern eyes this numbers juggling seems really ahistorical. southwestern quebec and the ottawa valley are not prominent to me because of how many people live in a certain number of square miles, it's prominent because it's the central locus of canada's founding history. the country came into being here - drafted in ottawa and financed from saint james street.

the legal, cultural and financial underpinnings of the canadian national project (which is now free to branch off into whatever new things it pleases) came from this region. it's hard to think of these sorts of things, maybe, when you are surrounded by ancient towering mountains and ski chalet-looking frozen yogurt stores but from my desk in montreal's old port it all still seems sort of real, so forgive me.

You gotta love it when kool does his thing.

[Doug_Cgy]

the new canada -- as featured in things like the globe and mail and maclean's -- is a sort of young, boisterous, english-speaking country whose easternmost city is ottawa (there might be a few islands off that coast with lobsters and stuff. we're not sure.)

with my parents in los angeles and a lot of my work/social contacts in the tri-state area i hardly go to canada anymore, which sort of sucks... but it's slipping off my radar and there's a yawning montreal-shaped hole in it anyway. this western thing may be making us sort of pastless.

(that said: i'm in toronto tomorrow and will be doing some recon. all the above can't put a dent in my half-closeted love of toronto.)

Don't you live in Montreal:koko: No matter what you say...You're still in Canada

[kool maudit]

i know, i know - i'm not a separatist. we're growing apart though, so i used that as a rhetorical device.

[Acajack]

i know, i know - i'm not a separatist. we're growing apart though, so i used that as a rhetorical device.

Though I am not a sovereignist either, this perceived indifference to the country's history and roots is one of (the many) drivers of the independence movement in Quebec.

While it is true that one should not remain a prisoner of history, it is equally unwise to throw it all into the garbage can without so much as a second thought.

Although I am personally totally functional within it and not economically disadvantaged by it in the least, when I find myself in prime "new Canada" territory (and the allusion to this being the only Canada mainstream anglo media seems to care about is excellent) like the Maple Leaf lounge at Pearson airport, that as someone with four-century francophone roots here, I often tell myself that this might be how aboriginals felt when they saw a whole bunch of European settlers all of a sudden building a brand new town just downriver.

[vid]

We were more talking about Southern Quebec. Everyone knows nobody lives in Northern Quebec

Southern Ontario's density: around 86.47 people/km2
Southern Quebec' density: around 50 people/km2(being generous by including cities that are not in Southern Quebec)

Southern Ontario actually has a density of over 110 people per square kilometre.

[ue]

I don't really get why Québec would want to seperate so much though. I just think we (english speaking canada) need to perhaps accommodate them better. Québec was the original Canada, they can't just not be apart of Canada anymore.

Sorry for going off topic.

[Reesonov]

Though I am not a sovereignist either, this perceived indifference to the country's history and roots is one of (the many) drivers of the independence movement in Quebec.

While it is true that one should not remain a prisoner of history, it is equally unwise to throw it all into the garbage can without so much as a second thought.

Although I am personally totally functional within it and not economically disadvantaged by it in the least, when I find myself in prime "new Canada" territory (and the allusion to this being the only Canada mainstream anglo media seems to care about is excellent) like the Maple Leaf lounge at Pearson airport, that as someone with four-century francophone roots here, I often tell myself that this might be how aboriginals felt when they saw a whole bunch of European settlers all of a sudden building a brand new town just downriver.

We westerners truly are a wretched lot. Wallowing in the periphery always. Subsisting on frozen yogurt and potatoes, toiling in the ski chalet-themed gulags, gazing down that long railroad track to Montreal, dreaming of "our" historical locus, so many thousands of kilometres away. Can you not forgive us for being indifferent to it?

[Doug_Cgy]

Doesn't every part of the country feel like they're getting f*cked over sometimes? From a western perspective we see ALOT of news about the government is always "sucking" up to Quebec. The U.S. Government would never grant Quebec the things Canada has (if Quebec we're a state)...I.E. Recognizing Quebec as "a nation within"...To me, these are the things that are breaking this country apart! I think B.C. & Alberta need to be recognized as a nation within Canada...Why not Ontario, Saskatchewan...and so on and on too??

[vid]

Doesn't every part of the country feel like they're getting f*cked over sometimes? From a western perspective we see ALOT of news about the government is always "sucking" up to Quebec. The U.S. Government would never grant Quebec the things Canada has (if Quebec we're a state)...I.E. Recognizing Quebec as "a nation within"...To me, these are the things that are breaking this country apart! I think B.C. & Alberta need to be recognized as a nation within Canada...Why not Ontario, Saskatchewan...and so on and on too??

Every region thinks it deserves more.

"Quebec as a nation" is kind of arbitrary, but recognizing the Québécois as a distinct group of people that make up a part of what is Canada makes perfect sense.

Other distinct groups that exist almost solely in Canada, like Newfoundlanders, Acadians, Inuit, the various First Nations and so on, are deserving of similar recognition.

It's more about recognizing that segment of French-Canadians than giving a province more power within the country.

Ontarians and Albertans and British Columbians, especially the typical citizens of those provinces (English speaking city dwellers of European or Asian descent) aren't that unique. You find them in the US and Australia too. Their culture isn't as easily defined and recognized as the Québécois, and what separates them from English speaking people in other countries isn't as big as what separates them from the Québécois or Newfoundlanders or Acadians or Cree.

[Andy6]

i know the west has to be all bold and frontiersy and future-oriented, but to my eastern eyes this numbers juggling seems really ahistorical. southwestern quebec and the ottawa valley are not prominent to me because of how many people live in a certain number of square miles, they're prominent because they're the central locus of canada's founding history. the country came into being here - drafted in ottawa and financed from saint james street.[/img]

All based on the fur trade in the west. Obviously the Hudson's Bay Company and Northwest Company, with their prairie-based activities, were the real formative force in Canadian history. The lazy guys who stayed back in Montreal might have drawn up some of the documents but so what. It's like saying the world of Star Trek was formed by bureaucrats back at HQ on Earth rather than by Captain Kirk and Spock.

The standards by which we judge "prominence" tend to be based on what seemed significant in the context of the place in which our ideas of things were formed. That could be newness or oldness, depending on the place. You and I prefer oldness; the chasm between us and the newness people is too vast ever to traverse.

[PPAR]

Wow- post a comment and come back a day later...

Bikegypsy I did mean geographic area, as in square kilometers- not demographics. But that seems so irrelevant now that we have density figures (I note similar values) and maps posted (I agree southern Quebec is more compact).

Glad to see the same old things still cause an uprising.

In a similar vein...anyone for a discussion on Senate and House of Commons representation? (just kidding)

[Acajack]

We westerners truly are a wretched lot. Wallowing in the periphery always. Subsisting on frozen yogurt and potatoes, toiling in the ski chalet-themed gulags, gazing down that long railroad track to Montreal, dreaming of "our" historical locus, so many thousands of kilometres away. Can you not forgive us for being indifferent to it?

Note that I had Ontario as much in mind as I did the West when I posted this (Pearson airport is not in Saskatchewan or Alberta to my knowledge), and that I also think many Atlantic Canadians might also feel this way.

In any event, judging from your comments, it sounds like you were responding more to Kool Maudit than me anyway.

[Canadian Mind]

Every region thinks it deserves more.

"Quebec as a nation" is kind of arbitrary, but recognizing the Québécois as a distinct group of people that make up a part of what is Canada makes perfect sense.

Other distinct groups that exist almost solely in Canada, like Newfoundlanders, Acadians, Inuit, the various First Nations and so on, are deserving of similar recognition.

It's more about recognizing that segment of French-Canadians than giving a province more power within the country.

Ontarians and Albertans and British Columbians, especially the typical citizens of those provinces (English speaking city dwellers of European or Asian descent) aren't that unique. You find them in the US and Australia too. Their culture isn't as easily defined and recognized as the Québécois, and what separates them from English speaking people in other countries isn't as big as what separates them from the Québécois or Newfoundlanders or Acadians or Cree.

As a counter argument to this vid, the Americans in the south are distinct to that region, yet are still called Americans, same for the crazy folks in West Virginia.

It's all these individual and unique cultures that have developed within Canada, and segmenting them off as their own nations of people is only going to divide the country, not unite it. Going back to the Americans in the south, a civil war took place which cost America over 600 000 lives. As far as I know the roots of the sessesion movement which eventually led to war was the ingrained idea that the people of the south was a different nation, unwilling to co-operate with the ideals of the majority of the country.

[MolsonExport]

There is some very good debating happening on this thread.

[Acajack]

As a counter argument to this vid, the Americans in the south are distinct to that region, yet are still called Americans, same for the crazy folks in West Virginia.

It's all these individual and unique cultures that have developed within Canada, and segmenting them off as their own nations of people is only going to divide the country, not unite it. Going back to the Americans in the south, a civil war took place which cost America over 600 000 lives. As far as I know the roots of the sessesion movement which eventually led to war was the ingrained idea that the people of the south was a different nation, unwilling to co-operate with the ideals of the majority of the country.

Well, the francophone (largely but not exclusively embodied by Quebec) and aboriginal cultures at least, have not "developed" in Canada. They pre-date the existence of Canada as we know it.

Other than these examples, I don't really see any other examples of parallel cultures in this country that could be seen as defiantly un-Canadian.

And as far as Canada's unity goes, well most "threats" to it are actually collective reactions/bitterness/irascibilities that were borne out of historic attempts to suppress these identities that were actually part of the Canadian fabric to begin with and should have been embraced from the outset.

[Canadian Mind]

Well, the francophone (largely but not exclusively embodied by Quebec) and aboriginal cultures at least, have not "developed" in Canada. They pre-date the existence of Canada as we know it.


Yes they do predate the existance of the country, but they are very much a part of it's histroy and development of the country, and in that sense they are as much Canadian as cultures that developed after the country existed. The only difference between before and after confederation was naming the areas within the lines drawn on the ground.

[Andy6]

Yes they do predate the existance of the country, but they are very much a part of it's histroy and development of the country, and in that sense they are as much Canadian as cultures that developed after the country existed. The only difference between before and after confederation was naming the areas within the lines drawn on the ground.

The British peoples of Canada also predate Canada as we know it. Obviously both British and French have been tremendously influenced by the nearly 250 years of sharing this country. Even in the purely genetic sense, many Quebecois are partly of British descent ... for example, I saw a genealogical study awhile ago that showed that every recent Quebec premier except one (I forget who; maybe Landry) is part English or Irish.

[raggedy13]

The area of southern Quebec was already called Canada before Canada the country existed. Southern Quebec was the first place to be called Canada by Europeans (and natives before them). Quebec is the most Canadian part of the country both from a historical geography point of view as well as contemporary stereotypes... hockey, maple syrup, Celine Dion, etc. They can't escape it. :D

[Acajack]

The area of southern Quebec was already called Canada before Canada the country existed. Southern Quebec was the first place to be called Canada by Europeans (and natives before them). Quebec is the most Canadian part of the country both from a historical geography point of view as well as contemporary stereotypes... hockey, maple syrup, Celine Dion, etc. They can't escape it. :D

Actually, if you spoke for a while to separatists you'd see that that's sort of their point. I.e., that Quebec is the "real Canada", and that the rest of the country has strayed so far from its historical origins (and is ignorant of them and sometimes even hostile to them), to the point where they think independence is necessary to preserve what is left of the "original Canada".

Not saying I necessarily agree with them (I believe there are many different ways to be a modern-day Canadian...), but to say that Quebec separatists reject "traditional Canada" is mostly false. They generally see themselves as the last defenders of it. Only the name on the label is different.

[Canadian Mind]

Well beneath the verbatum of us not treating the french uniquely enough or not giving them a big enough piece of the pie, what about traditional Canada has the rest of Canada strayed so far away from that they wih to separate?

[ue]

I personally don't get why northern Québec is called Québec. It looks too northern, should be a territory or something, and Labrador should be seperate (from NF).

Pardon my ignorance, if someone wants to, they can gladly explain so I can understand it better.

[Rico Rommheim]

Labrador should be part of Quebec. THe newfies can keep the island, not so much because it makes sense but it'll save thousands of tons of inc and saliva by avoiding to continuously refering to newfoundland as "Newfoundland and Labrador". St-John's is NOT part of Nfld-AND-Labrador!

[ue]

^I agree. I never got why the two were grouped together.

[someone123]

Newfoundland entered into Confederation with the Labrador coast, which was historically the only part of that area with real European involvement. The rest was mostly extrapolated territory carved up like Africa. Pre-Confederation Quebec did not include the Ungava Peninsula. As it is, it's fairly questionable to think that Quebec ought to have been awarded that territory or even that the hydro resources (and, umm.. power lines from other provinces) should have generated money for provincial coffers. In global economic terms Canadian natural resources are horribly managed.

The "drifting apart" is caused by a combination of parochialism and immigration. Newcomers to Toronto and Vancouver have few or no connections to other parts of Canada and most others don't travel much. Rural BC might as well be the Ozarks, and the Prairies are still pretty backwater. Canada doesn't have strong and interesting national cultural institutions because this country is bland, consensus-driven, lazy, and cheap.

Well beneath the verbatum of us not treating the french uniquely enough or not giving them a big enough piece of the pie, what about traditional Canada has the rest of Canada strayed so far away from that they wih to separate?

The French?

[ue]

^The prairies aren't that backwater, except for the small towns I guess. Edmonton, Regina, Calgary, Winnipeg, Saskatoon as well as the national and provincial parks and small cities like Red Deer and Moose Jaw aren't. That's already most of the population of the Prairies. But, not most of the land.

[Acajack]

Well beneath the verbatum of us not treating the french uniquely enough or not giving them a big enough piece of the pie, what about traditional Canada has the rest of Canada strayed so far away from that they wih to separate?

Not really sure if this is addressed to me, but if it is I am not really sure I should be answering for them (sovereignists). As I said above, I believe there are multiple ways that one can be a modern-day Canadian.

But if you're looking for answers, you shouldn't have to search very far in sovereignist discourse to find their beefs against Canada: for starters, the alleged betrayal of the so-called unwritten pact between two founding nations/peoples that Canada is supposed to be. Of course, not everyone agrees that this pact ever existed, but certainly among francophones (both sovereignist and federalist), there is a widespread (near-unanimous in fact) sentiment that this is the "spirit" that underlies all the ties that bind us together.

[Acajack]

Pre-Confederation Quebec did not include the Ungava Peninsula. As it is, it's fairly questionable to think that Quebec ought to have been awarded that territory or even that the hydro resources (and, umm.. power lines from other provinces) should have generated money for provincial coffers. In global economic terms Canadian natural resources are horribly managed.


I am pretty sure that when this territory was given to Quebec in the early part of the 20th century no one ever imagined that the province's francophone majority would one day get so uppity and assertive to the point of seriously flirting with the idea of separating from Canada and forming its own independent country.

[Canadian Mind]

Not really sure if this is addressed to me, but if it is I am not really sure I should be answering for them (sovereignists). As I said above, I believe there are multiple ways that one can be a modern-day Canadian.

But if you're looking for answers, you shouldn't have to search very far in sovereignist discourse to find their beefs against Canada: for starters, the alleged betrayal of the so-called unwritten pact between two founding nations/peoples that Canada is supposed to be. Of course, not everyone agrees that this pact ever existed, but certainly among francophones (both sovereignist and federalist), there is a widespread (near-unanimous in fact) sentiment that this is the "spirit" that underlies all the ties that bind us together.

Funny I've never heard anyone mention this pact before, separatist or federalist.

You know where I could go to find more info about this?

[Acajack]

Funny I've never heard anyone mention this pact before, separatist or federalist.

You know where I could go to find more info about this?

Special status, distinct society, Quebec as a ''nation'', ''Quebec is not a province like all the others'', Quebec's opposition to equality and symmetry in the powers the provinces have, even bilingualism... it's all based on that notion.

With all due respect, one can't have followed Canadian politics very much if you`ve never heard of this concept.

[Canadian Mind]

Special status, distinct society, Quebec as a ''nation'', ''Quebec is not a province like all the others'', Quebec's opposition to equality and symmetry in the powers the provinces have, even bilingualism... it's all based on that notion.

With all due respect, one can't have followed Canadian politics very much if you`ve never heard of this concept.

I've only been on the planet for 19 years.

And if thats the concept that you're talking about, then yea I have heard of it, and it's a crock of shit. Everyone deserves to be treated in equally in this country, english or french, native born or immigrant.

[kool maudit]

We westerners truly are a wretched lot. Wallowing in the periphery always. Subsisting on frozen yogurt and potatoes, toiling in the ski chalet-themed gulags, gazing down that long railroad track to Montreal, dreaming of "our" historical locus, so many thousands of kilometres away. Can you not forgive us for being indifferent to it?


of course. you are new and vibrant and doing your thing. it is a different country, insofar as a country is based on a common outlook.

[Architype]

Labrador should be part of Quebec. THe newfies can keep the island, not so much because it makes sense but it'll save thousands of tons of inc and saliva by avoiding to continuously refering to newfoundland as "Newfoundland and Labrador". St-John's is NOT part of Nfld-AND-Labrador!

Sure
thing
Newfoundland-Labrador-Quebec-#$&$#!

What century are you living in ??

Half the population of St. John's are from the rest of the island.

(If anyone means that seriously) - it does not deserve my time to reply to such ignorance and bigotry

[Ayreonaut]

Jesus, all he was saying is that Newfoundland and Labrador is a rather long name for a province.

[vid]

Northwest Territories is a long name for a territory. St-Jean-sur-Richelieu is a long name for a city. So?

[Reesonov]

of course. you are new and vibrant and doing your thing. it is a different country, insofar as a country is based on a common outlook.

Then we agree. That is good. I certainly feel no bitterness towards this idea. Places must have their own destinies (or outlooks), just as people have their own destinies. I don't understand why Canadians seem to struggle with this idea so much. We are many different countries, but yet one village too. Its all an accident of history of course, in the same way that it was an accident where each of us were born. But so what? A village has its many different characters, its old people, its young people, its love affairs and its feuds. This is not our weakness. It is our strength.

[ue]

I agree about Newfoundland and Labrador. Northwest Territories just doesn't give the same feeling IMO. Besides NF and LAB seem so separate.

[Reesonov]

Northwest Territories is a long name for a territory. St-Jean-sur-Richelieu is a long name for a city. So?

Thunder Bay is a great name for a city btw. It doesn't get enough recognition for this. Perhaps because it leads to a certain amount of disappointment?

[Architype]

Jesus, all he was saying is that Newfoundland and Labrador is a rather long name for a province.

I read more into that kind of statement, he is expressing the view that Labrador belongs to Quebec. He said "Labrador should be part of Quebec." How clear do you want it to be?

You know the Quebec/Nfld thing can be a sensitive issue and has a long history, and it's better to leave it alone.

As for the name, I prefer Newfoundland-Labrador. Labrador could be seperate from Nfld, but it would not choose to be part of Quebec.

I apologize if I missed the point of where the discussion was going.

[giallo]

Then we agree. That is good. I certainly feel no bitterness towards this idea. Places must have their own destinies (or outlooks), just as people have their own destinies. I don't understand why Canadians seem to struggle with this idea so much. We are many different countries, but yet one village too. Its all an accident of history of course, in the same way that it was an accident where each of us were born. But so what? A village has its many different characters, its old people, its young people, its love affairs and its feuds. This is not our weakness. It is our strength.

Nice. I'm feeling you on this.

I also don't get is this whole Canadians unable to understand Canadians thing. I get Halifax, I get Montreal, I get Toronto, and I would probably even get Nanisvik given the chance to visit. This country and its population isn't rocket science. Why do people try and make it so?

[vid]

Thunder Bay is a great name for a city btw. It doesn't get enough recognition for this. Perhaps because it leads to a certain amount of disappointment?

When we meet people online who have never heard of the city and we tell them we live in "Thunder Bay", their first thought seems to be that we're in the Caribbean.

[Acajack]

Then we agree. That is good. I certainly feel no bitterness towards this idea. Places must have their own destinies (or outlooks), just as people have their own destinies. I don't understand why Canadians seem to struggle with this idea so much. We are many different countries, but yet one village too. Its all an accident of history of course, in the same way that it was an accident where each of us were born. But so what? A village has its many different characters, its old people, its young people, its love affairs and its feuds. This is not our weakness. It is our strength.

Excellent stuff! :tup:

[Acajack]

I've only been on the planet for 19 years.

And if thats the concept that you're talking about, then yea I have heard of it, and it's a crock of shit. Everyone deserves to be treated in equally in this country, english or french, native born or immigrant.

This last sentence makes for a great motherhood statement but in practice it is not usually the case. Individuals have rights. Their languages and cultures –not necessarily.

English speakers (and French speakers too) have the right to publicly-funded schools in their own language in Canada. Ukranian and Italian speakers, though they may be native-born citizens, do not. Native-born Canadian Portuguese and Cantonese speakers do not have the right to publicly-funded TV and radio networks in their language. English and French speakers do.

No country, no matter how progressive, offers a multitude of community-sustaining services and institutions to every single distinct human group living on its territory.

And regarding immigrants to Canada, they actually have somewhat fewer rights than we do until they become citizens.

[Acajack]

Besides NF and LAB seem so separate.

People on the island of Newfoundland and in mainland Labrador probably have much more in common culturally than you might think.

Heck, even many of the towns on Quebec's Lower North Shore near the Labrador border (Blanc-Sablon, Harrington Harbour, La Tabatière, etc.) have a lot in common culturally with people in NL.

[Canadian Mind]

This last sentence makes for a great motherhood statement but in practice it is not usually the case. Individuals have rights. Their languages and cultures –not necessarily.

English speakers (and French speakers too) have the right to publicly-funded schools in their own language in Canada. Ukranian and Italian speakers, though they may be native-born citizens, do not. Native-born Canadian Portuguese and Cantonese speakers do not have the right to publicly-funded TV and radio networks in their language. English and French speakers do.

No country, no matter how progressive, offers a multitude of community-sustaining services and institutions to every single distinct human group living on its territory.

And regarding immigrants to Canada, they actually have somewhat fewer rights than we do until they become citizens.


Maybe I worded it wrong. When I said English or French, I was highlighting the two official languages which should be given equal treatment nationwide. As for native born or immigrant, i was reffering to you being a citizen, regardless of where you come from.

If you move to Canada and refuse to learn either French or English, why do you deserve citizenship, and why do you deserve service in our country?

[kool maudit]

yeah but you can have immigrated here and not be a citizen. my dad's been here since '74 but is still a landed immigrant rather than a canadian citizen.

[Reesonov]

When we meet people online who have never heard of the city and we tell them we live in "Thunder Bay", their first thought seems to be that we're in the Caribbean.

Yes, well, that would be disappointing then.

[Reesonov]

Nice. I'm feeling you on this.

I also don't get is this whole Canadians unable to understand Canadians thing. I get Halifax, I get Montreal, I get Toronto, and I would probably even get Nanisvik given the chance to visit. This country and its population isn't rocket science. Why do people try and make it so?

Completely agree. The answer, of course, is that we are provincial and immature and still learning what a country is. This forum helps though. Fuck, I think I even get Thunder Bay now, thanks largely to vid. Although, I am prepared for the possibility that my perception or imagination of Thunder Bay is slightly skewed. But I'm cool with that.

[vid]

Probably skewed. I never go to our suburbs. I barely know what they're like, other than the fact that the snout houses aren't very big here. (Detached garages in the back yard mostly; we have larger residential lots than most cities; always have.) I grew up in a suburb, but it was a separate community started in the 1930s that got absorbed by sprawl and right by the highway and a shopping mall, I've never lived in the isolated "middle-of-nowhere" tract house neighbourhoods. Also, the designs of house are more varied. You see pictures of houses in Toronto and there are maybe 10 different floor plants (not counting rotations and reflections of plans); we must have at least 50, and there are quite a few "original" designs mixed in. (House plans that aren't repeated, at least in the same neighbourhood.) Not very urban, but it isn't so repetitive.

My neighbourhood is considered to be the worst of the city and I don't do much to cover up its bad side so for most people, the city will look better when they visit (based on what they see in my Flickr stream). My emphasis on urban areas will likely skew the mental picture of you guys though. I'd like someone from here to at least go to Intercity and tell me how it compared to other big box store hellscapes. I think it might be one of the most pedestrian oriented big box wastelands in the country. Balmoral Park is another story. I never go there, either.

[Maersk]

It always amazes me how the Quebec forum members still have a 1970s image of the West. The Vancouver- Calgary- Edmonton triangle is similar in geographic area to Southern Quebec, and now has a population of 8 million, this compares to Quebec's current population of 7.5 million. It really does not seem too isolated to me (I moved from Ontario 7 years ago).
An interesting aside, Calgary's population is currently about the same as Vancouver's was in the early '70s.

I've never considered Vancouver to be in some sort of triangle with Edmonton and Calgary. There is way too much land separation. Not to mention the mountains and lack of good transportation infrastructure between the two. I group Vancouver in with Seattle and Portland as "the northwest" or "cascadia". We've got 10 million+ people.

[Architype]

Vancouver's triangle is with Seattle and Victoria, and to a lesser degree Portland, with Calgary being a more distant 4th.

[240glt]

^ More like a non-existent 4th.

Edmonton and Calgary form their own corridor. The only virtual link to any other major centre is by air

[Metro-One]

Yeah, for me it is the south coastal area - Vancouver and Suburbs, Abbotsford, Chilliwack and the Valley, Nanaimo, Victoria and area, then across the border it continues with Bellingham, Seattle and Tacoma. To me that is the true Pacific Northwest Corridor, which is around 8 million people in a relatively small area, 10 to 11 million if extend all the way down to Portland.

[LotusLand]

Yeah, for me it is the south coastal area - Vancouver and Suburbs, Abbotsford, Chilliwack and the Valley, Nanaimo, Victoria and area, then across the border it continues with Bellingham, Seattle and Tacoma. To me that is the true Pacific Northwest Corridor, which is around 8 million people in a relatively small area, 10 to 11 million if extend all the way down to Portland.

Yeah Agree totally the lower mainland, Seattle, Victoria and Portland form Cascadia which is pretty 10 million plus. Never thought of Calgary and Edmonton to form a triangle with Van. I mean I go to seattle to catch a ball game (football or baseball) at least a dozen times a year. If there was no border wait the trip is really like 2 1/2 hours to Seattle and I live in Vancouver proper.

[MonctonRad]

The Maritimes corridor is Saint John-Moncton-Halifax; total driving time about 4 hours all on divided highway. The total corridor population (including intervening communities) is about 850-900,000 or about half the population of the entire Maritime provinces.

[isaidso]

The Maritimes corridor is Saint John-Moncton-Halifax; total driving time about 4 hours all on divided highway. The total corridor population (including intervening communities) is about 850-900,000 or about half the population of the entire Maritime provinces.

The Maritimes is roughly the same size as southern Ontario. It's small enough that it really could be viewed as one continuous population belt of 1.9 million people. At the very least, the corridor you described above could stretch past Saint John north up the river valley till you hit Fredericton.

[ssiguy]

Yeah, for me it is the south coastal area - Vancouver and Suburbs, Abbotsford, Chilliwack and the Valley, Nanaimo, Victoria and area, then across the border it continues with Bellingham, Seattle and Tacoma. To me that is the true Pacific Northwest Corridor, which is around 8 million people in a relatively small area, 10 to 11 million if extend all the way down to Portland.

I think you are right in a purely demographic way although I am not including any of the US. Lower Mainland/Island would be one mass if not for the water but I think they are completly different. Totally different attitudes, lifestyles, outlooks, economy, and even political views. As soon as you take the ferry it always seems like you are going to another world. Considering they are so close and in the same province I find it quite striking how little they have in common.

[Canadian Mind]

I think you are right in a purely demographic way although I am not including any of the US. Lower Mainland/Island would be one mass if not for the water but I think they are completly different. Totally different attitudes, lifestyles, outlooks, economy, and even political views. As soon as you take the ferry it always seems like you are going to another world. Considering they are so close and in the same province I find it quite striking how little they have in common.

The only differences i've ever seen were as follows:
"We're on the Island"
"We're on the mainland"

:banana:

Yes, living on the Island generally meant places had more of a small town feel and the feeling of being out there, but thats because the island is a jumble of small communities separated by atleast an hour and a half's ferry ride from Vancouver. Otherwise it's the same relaxed westcoast lifestyle. individual regions have idividual personalities, but you'll find that in the lower mainland as much as you do as when you cross the straight.

[PPAR]

Yeah Agree totally the lower mainland, Seattle, Victoria and Portland form Cascadia which is pretty 10 million plus. Never thought of Calgary and Edmonton to form a triangle with Van. I mean I go to seattle to catch a ball game (football or baseball) at least a dozen times a year. If there was no border wait the trip is really like 2 1/2 hours to Seattle and I live in Vancouver proper.

A wonderful sentiment to welcome in Canada Day 2009!

[240glt]

^ Many west coasters visit western Washington on a very regular basis. Just like Edmonton and Calgary form a corridor, Vancouver and Seattle form a much more populous one. People seems to move around within these corridors a lot, and it doesn't really matter if there is a border separating large populations. As long as the border is easily passible, people will move across it. Nobody goes from Vancouver to Edmonton or Calgary to shop for the day, but there are lots who'll go down to Bellingham or Seattle.