Quebec plans to reopen constitutional debate - Page 3

wave46 · #41 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 8:30 PM**

This country has been pretty harmonious from 2000 or so. Why destroy it with a constitutional debate?

The federal system Canada has works reasonably well right now - not perfect, but no federation ever is. Unless I'm reading the mood of the country incorrectly, there's no appetite for big changes. Especially if the changes won't really change the status quo per se. It just inflames passions, then some idiots end up stomping on a Quebec flag and then everyone's angry.

Justin Trudeau is an astute politician. He knows a losing idea when he sees one. This has all sorts of downside and little upside. Let a 'grand ideas' Prime Minister die on that particular hill.

milomilo · #42 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by begratto

Why not, if the other provinces are not interested in having these powers anyway?

Have they been asked? If there is a reason that Quebec should have a veto, such as it not wanting Canada to be dominated by the majority of provinces or population etc, then it is only fair that the other provinces have similar protection. I don't see that as unreasonable, and find it quite shocking that anyone would think it is fair that one province (a large and powerful one for that matter) should have veto rights that others don't.

I fully admit to being uneducated on this matter though.

Corndogger · #43 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 8:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

What's unclear? Take Corndogger for example. He lives in Calgary.

Please explain to me which of these measures, if adopted, are even remotely likely to have an impact on his life:

■Recognition of Quebec as a distinct society.
■Limits on federal spending power.
■Guaranteed Quebec representation on the Supreme Court.
■A constitutional veto right.
■Increased control over immigration.

Why should any province have greater powers than another? These demands are fucking insane. If you don't understand the implications to the rest of the country you're the one with the problem not me. If Quebec is part of Canada then why does it need special powers? I hope Brad Wall tells Quebec to fuck off with these demands or leave. How would you like it if the rest of the country held a referendum on whether or not we want Quebec to be part of the country? I don't see why you would have a problem it based on these demands. It's time for the rest of the country to stand up to Quebec and put an end to the nonstop ransom demands. And after we vote to kick you the hell out we'll send you a bill for what you owe us.

flar · #44 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 8:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

Quebec should absolutely NOT get a veto right that other provinces do not have.

Quebec will never agree to anything less.

But doesn't matter, because the other provinces will never unanimously agree to give Quebec a veto unless they all get a veto.

That's why I say the situation is intractable.

Acajack · #45 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 8:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by begratto

Why not, if the other provinces are not interested in having these powers anyway?

It's all about the other guy not having something that you don't. Regardless of whether you need it or not. The proverbial fish that wants a bicycle.

Acajack · #46 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Why should any province have greater powers than another? These demands are fucking insane. If you don't understand the implications to the rest of the country you're the one with the problem not me. If Quebec is part of Canada then why does it need special powers? I hope Brad Wall tells Quebec to fuck off with these demands or leave. How would you like it if the rest of the country held a referendum on whether or not we want Quebec to be part of the country? I don't see why you would have a problem it based on these demands. It's time for the rest of the country to stand up to Quebec and put an end to the nonstop ransom demands. And after we vote to kick you the hell out we'll send you a bill for what you owe us.

You are such a great Canadian. What a source of pride.

Corndogger · #47 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

You are such a great Canadian. What a source of pride.

You're the type of Quebecer that the rest of the country hates with a passion. Always demanding something new and then when not given it resorts to character assassination. I have no problem reopening the constitution as long as everyone gets a say. In other words, I want a referendum to be held on every last proposed change. I don't see why you would have a problem with that. Quebec does believe in democracy, doesn't it?

Corndogger · #48 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's all about the other guy not having something that you don't. Regardless of whether you need it or not. The proverbial fish that wants a bicycle.

You're really revealing your true intentions with that post.

wave46 · #49 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:26 PM**

...and this thread is in a nutshell is why we strenuously avoid constitutional debate in this country. Truly, this thread is Canada in a microcosm.

Bandage · #50 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

You're really revealing your true intentions with that post.

I played a game once where I tried to count to number of times his posts include the words Quebec or francophone. I got tired and quit after one post.

Martin Mtl · #51 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:44 PM**

Looks like it's not the only fire that Trudeau will have to put off in this country. Alberta is picking a fight with BC and there is even talk of BC separation in the comments section. What a country!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ticle35176658/

geotag277 · #52 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Looks like it's not the only fire that Trudeau will have to put off in this country. Alberta is picking a fight with BC and there is even talk of BC separation in the comments section. What a country!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ticle35176658/

Nothing new under the sun really. These kinds of high school level showmanship politics have been a staple of Canada coast to coast for 150 years.

geotag277 · #53 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:53 PM**

I don't think giving Quebec veto powers is really all that ostentatious.

From Quebec's perspective, as the unique distinct "French nation", they will never really be in the position to amend the constitution with legislation without the explicit buy in from the rest of English Canada. In essence, English Canada will always have a veto power, because if they don't agree, it will not be ratified. As such, they want a voice to strike down any potential constitutional amendment they don't agree with, with the rather implicit understanding that they won't have the political power to push through amendments that they would otherwise want to see pushed through.

From that perspective, I think it is an eminently reasonable request. And one that other provinces shouldn't be falling down the "if they can we should" rabbit hole.

Martin Mtl · #54 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by geotag277

I don't think giving Quebec veto powers is really all that ostentatious.

From Quebec's perspective, as the unique distinct "French nation", they will never really be in the position to amend the constitution with legislation without the explicit buy in from the rest of English Canada. In essence, English Canada will always have a veto power, because if they don't agree, it will not be ratified. As such, they want a voice to strike down any potential constitutional amendment they don't agree with, with the rather implicit understanding that they won't have the political power to push through amendments that they would otherwise want to see pushed through.

From that perspective, I think it is an eminently reasonable request. And one that other provinces shouldn't be falling down the "if they can we should" rabbit hole.

In these matters, I'm afraid reason is a rare commodity.

Corndogger · #55 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Looks like it's not the only fire that Trudeau will have to put off in this country. Alberta is picking a fight with BC and there is even talk of BC separation in the comments section. What a country!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ticle35176658/

AB definitely didn't start this fight and let BC separate.

Martin Mtl · #56 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 10:06 PM**

Couillard knows very well that his proposal is going nowhere with the rest of Canada. He's not even counting on it. It's purely an electoral move on his part (election are this fall in Quebec), a way to short-circuit the PQ and the CAQ. We probably won't even ear about it after the election, once the Liberals have another 4-years mandate. End of the story.

Corndogger · #57 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 10:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by geotag277

I don't think giving Quebec veto powers is really all that ostentatious.

From Quebec's perspective, as the unique distinct "French nation", they will never really be in the position to amend the constitution with legislation without the explicit buy in from the rest of English Canada. In essence, English Canada will always have a veto power, because if they don't agree, it will not be ratified. As such, they want a voice to strike down any potential constitutional amendment they don't agree with, with the rather implicit understanding that they won't have the political power to push through amendments that they would otherwise want to see pushed through.

From that perspective, I think it is an eminently reasonable request. And one that other provinces shouldn't be falling down the "if they can we should" rabbit hole.

So if everyone else wants a certain change to be made you're fine with Quebec being able to stop that from happening? They're request (demand) is not reasonable at all. If Quebec wants to be distinct let them do it outside of Canada.

Martin Mtl · #58 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 10:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

AB definitely didn't start this fight and let BC separate.

From the article (pretty strong words from Albertan politicians, at the very least):

(...) Wildrose Leader Brian Jean said B.C. is now captive to “eco-radicals.” One of his senior colleagues, Derek Fildebrandt tweeted that the “inmates are running the asylum” in B.C. He also publicly agreed with the suggestion that if B.C. stops the pipeline “it’s political war.”(...)

geotag277 · #59 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 10:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corndogger

So if everyone else wants a certain change to be made you're fine with Quebec being able to stop that from happening? They're request (demand) is not reasonable at all. If Quebec wants to be distinct let them do it outside of Canada.

I trust Quebec will not be unreasonable in it's application of it's veto power, yes. In other words, if Quebec did want to veto something, I think there would be a good reason, and they would be using political capital in a national context to invoke that veto.

And again, English speaking Canada has an implicit veto in the fact that Quebec cannot possibly ratify amendments without English Canada buy in.

geotag277 · #60 Posted **Jun 1, 2017, 10:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

From the article (pretty strong words from Albertan politicians, at the very least):

(...) Wildrose Leader Brian Jean said B.C. is now captive to “eco-radicals.” One of his senior colleagues, Derek Fildebrandt tweeted that the “inmates are running the asylum” in B.C. He also publicly agreed with the suggestion that if B.C. stops the pipeline “it’s political war.”(...)

Off topic, but many in AB would characterize Wildrose, even in their limited capacity as official opposition in Alberta, as "inmates running the asylum" as well.

Wildrose are good at verbal diarrhea zingers that grab National Enquirer level headlines, much to the embarrassment of many here.

As an aside, the Wildrose and Conservative parties have recently agreed upon a merger, with many conservative voters unable to stomach the fringe elements of the Wildrose platform. We will have an interesting next provincial election for sure.