The Future of Canada and its regions....

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by wave46

Agricultural regions have been the rural areas least affected by out migration. Those areas haven't boomed population-wise, but they haven't collapsed either. It has been the mining, forestry and fishing towns that have suffered the most decline.

Indeed, it seems that as traditional farming families have moved out of agriculture, groups such as Mennonites have replaced them. Farms aren't going fallow.

For provinces that have a rural base that's mostly agricultural, I don't see much change from the status quo. It will be the provinces that have a rural base that's dependent on something else that will have the most challenges (sorry Newfoundland).

Mennonites are a growth demographic?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Mennonites are a growth demographic?

Pretty much always on the lookout for new land to farm, no?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

I would argue that the election of the CAQ is further proof of sovereignty's dying relevance since it is the first time in forever that Quebec chose a party which is largely quiet on the issue.

Wait, you're arguing that resoundingly kicking the only federalist party to the curb in a historic way while electing an ex-PQ minister and having PQ+QS (who almost merged, FYI; also, Manon Massé is on record claiming they, not the current version of the PQ, are the true legacy of René Lévesque, which is not that far-fetched - very interesting correlation between the ridings won PQ/1970 and QS/2018) hit new relative highs in popular support, is sovereignty's relevance regressing, when we're looking at a snapshot of the last few years...?!?

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Mennonites are a growth demographic?

Yes, in PEI at least:

"The decision to move to P.E.I. was a shot in the dark for Mennonite couple Samuel and Ellen Bowman.

It is now starting to pay off.
The couple, along with four other families from their Mennonite church left Elmira, Ont., about a year ago to move to Prince Edward Island.

Samuel said while moving to a new area was a bit of a challenge, they’ve felt welcomed by the community.

“Everybody has been very open and we’ve had a good welcome,” he said, noting the couple became interested in P.E.I. after hearing the province was looking for more small-scale farmers.

While there was some uncertainty over resettling in a new and unfamiliar province, the high cost and low availability of farmland in Ontario has created a need for the Mennonite community to spread out."

https://www.theguardian.pe.ca/news/m...-river-194595/

[lio45]

Originally Posted by CityTech

If you read the QS platform online, the page on sovereignty is linked to near the bottom of the page (three other things come first). The page itself (https://appuyez.quebecsolidaire.net/independance) talks about independence as a way to promote environmentalism and ditch the monarchy; the traditional nationalist viewpoints involving a sense of distinct peoplehood and the preservation of the French language are completely absent.

It really gives off the sense that independence isn't really their main thing and it's part of an overall leftwing agenda rather than actual nationalism. Sort of like what the SNP in Scotland is like these days.

Actually QS's political positions are pretty distinct from the rest of Canada..... which is pretty much the exact point: if you find yourself at odds with most of the values of the rest of the confederation you happen to currently share a country with, that's a good reason to split ways (in a friendly manner, of course).

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Yes, in PEI at least:

Indeed. The population in the area around Montague in Kings County PEI has had a nice bump because of the Mennonites. There was even a second wave of immigration.

Also, Buddhists have taken a shine to the Montague area. There's a big monastery there with a couple of hundred adherents.

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by lio45

Wait, you're arguing that resoundingly kicking the only federalist party to the curb in a historic way while electing an ex-PQ minister and having PQ+QS (who almost merged, FYI; also, Manon Massé is on record claiming they, not the current version of the PQ, are the true legacy of René Lévesque, which is not that far-fetched - very interesting correlation between the ridings won PQ/1970 and QS/2018) hit new relative highs in popular support, is sovereignty's relevance regressing, when we're looking at a snapshot of the last few years...?!?

CAQ isn't a sovereigntist party. Legault has come out and said it isn't and they would never hold a referendum on the matter. So it's not a case of the sovereigntists kicking out the federalists in a historic way. If anything, it's Quebec choosing a third option since they don't want either traditional option. It's the first time in fifty years this has happened.

Calling the sum results of the PQ+QS a "relative high" is disingenuous. The PQ received its lowest percentage of the vote ever in this election, and given the PQ/QS are the two biggest left-leaning parties I believe they also get a substantial amount of votes from voters who don't expect a referendum (which makes sense, given the PQ has been quick to say they won't hold one ever since it bit them in 2014).

I guess I should counter the argument that sovereignty got 30% of the vote with the fact that federalism got a supermajority?

[Doug]

All of the Atlantic Provinces will likely face insolvency in the next ten years and neither they nor the Feds are trying to head that off, by for example requiring modest budget surpluses as a condition for federal transfers. SK likely has the brightest future as it has the strongest fiscal momentum and lots of natural resourcee. QC could also be ascendant if it keeps up the progress it has made in defanging separatism and reforming its economy. AB and ON are in the biggest trouble outside of Atlantic Canada unless they can sharply reduce spending to shrink deficits that will balloon with rising interest rates.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

CAQ isn't a sovereigntist party. Legault has come out and said it isn't and they would never hold a referendum on the matter. So it's not a case of the sovereigntists kicking out the federalists in a historic way. If anything, it's Quebec choosing a third option since they don't want either traditional option. It's the first time in fifty years this has happened.

Calling the sum results of the PQ+QS a "relative high" is disingenuous. The PQ received its lowest percentage of the vote ever in this election, and given the PQ/QS are the two biggest left-leaning parties I believe they also get a substantial amount of votes from voters who don't expect a referendum (which makes sense, given the PQ has been quick to say they won't hold one ever since it bit them in 2014).

I guess I should counter the argument that sovereignty got 30% of the vote with the fact that federalism got a supermajority?

The problem we have with your train of thought is that you're arguing that the issue is pretty much dead, when it obviously it isn't.

No one here is countering by saying that independence is imminent (or even likely to happen ever), but that's not the same as saying it is over and done with.

The CAQ is a convenient place to park one's vote for people who might like to see Quebec become independent one day, but know that's not going to be happening for a while.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

CAQ isn't a sovereigntist party.

It's a semi-sovereigntist party, because it obviously is not a federalist party. (We DO have a federalist party. It was just shown the door pretty epically - support for it is at an all-time low, in fact. Though you'll want to note that anglophones, who are always federalist, have of course continued to vote for the federalist party, because that's what strong federalists do in this province.)

Legault has come out and said it isn't and they would never hold a referendum on the matter.

Sure, but you're aware that by that kind of standard, neither the PQ nor the CAQ are sovereigntist parties? In politicianspeak, "never" basically means "definitely not on the horizon, at the very least". (That's for those who are honest.) And everyone agrees that it's not happening in the foreseeable future, so we might as well temporarily stop arguing about it.

If anything, it's Quebec choosing a third option since they don't want either traditional option.

Yeah, after almost 15 years of choosing the openly federalist option, we chose an "in between" option. It's mind-boggling that you'd find that to be a progression of the federalist option. When a province dumps its Liberals to elect its PC, is that a shift to the left in your view...?

Calling the sum results of the PQ+QS a "relative high" is disingenuous.

It is a relative high. And the two parties overlap a LOT. The QS is a fresher version of the PQ. The PQ has always been very left-leaning. They seriously considered a merger, but it did not happen because QS knew they could supplant the PQ as a newer version of it, and it's always more advantageous to eliminate your opponent if you can pull that off than to have a merger with it, especially if you're considered the smaller player at the time of the negotiation.

The PQ received its lowest percentage of the vote ever in this election

Yeah, of course they did - QS stole a bunch of PQ strongholds (look at which ridings they won) and a large chunk of their vote. That's like saying the right is dying in Alberta because "the Alberta Conservatives received their lowest percentage ever"... after the Wildrose got created.

As a matter of fact..... those parties have now merged, and we're almost certainly going to see a return to normalcy in Alberta. Who'd have thought?

I guess I should counter the argument that sovereignty got 30% of the vote with the fact that federalism got a supermajority?

It definitely did not, as I'm sure you know.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Yeah, of course they did - QS stole a bunch of PQ strongholds and a large chunk of their vote..

When you think about it the CAQ actually stole away a good number of traditional PQ votes too.

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The problem we have with your train of thought is that you're arguing that the issue is pretty much dead, when it obviously it isn't.

No one here is countering by saying that independence is imminent (or even likely to happen ever), but that's not the same as saying it is over and done with.

The CAQ is a convenient place to park one's vote for people who might like to see Quebec become independent one day, but know that's not going to be happening for a while.

No, I said that sovereignty is dying. I did not say it is pretty much dead, though I do believe it will be within twenty years. Approximately one-in-five people between the ages of 19-25 consider themselves sovereigntists. The majority of its ardent supporters are old and they aren't being replaced by their grandkids.

The last time a sovereigntist party received a mandate was in 2012, and that was a minority government. That government was subsequently kicked to the curb as soon as sovereignty became an election issue; Quebeckers had no appetite for it. This was the first election in forty years where all parties put it on the backburner and did not make it an electoral issue.

Do people still vote for the sovereigntists? Of course, I didn't say they didn't. That's not how views change in voters; in Russia people still vote for the Communist Party. What I am saying is that it is no longer the driving force of Quebec politics like it once was. Things are going well in Quebec right now - the economy is good, it's cultural output is massive, and federally they have a significant voice and can include the Prime Minister amongst their ranks. When even the most ardent separatist party takes a step back and has to assure voters it won't seek independence if it's elected, you know you have a dying issue at hand.

To tie it back into the topic of this thread, since there is no longer speculation over Quebec's political status in the short-to-medium term, there is more confidence in its economy. People aren't afraid to invest knowing that the government isn't going to try and drive a wedge between it and the rest of Canada. In terms of the sovereigntist debate, this is the most stable period in Quebec since the Quiet Revolution and I think part (however small) of Quebec's economic prosperity at this moment can be attributed to that.

Originally Posted by lio45

It's a semi-sovereigntist party, because it obviously is not a federalist party. (We DO have a federalist party. It was just shown the door pretty epically - support for it is at an all-time low, in fact. Though you'll want to note that anglophones, who are always federalist, have of course continued to vote for the federalist party, because that's what strong federalists do in this province.)

What's the definition you use of sovereigntist and federalist? To me, a sovereigntist party is a party which eventually wants independence, and a federalist party is one that does not want to leave Canada. CAQ does not want to leave Canada, it is in no way a sovereigntist party. Seeking more independence for Quebec within Confederation does not make it semi-sovereigntist.

Originally Posted by lio45

Sure, but you're aware that by that kind of standard, neither the PQ nor the CAQ are sovereigntist parties? In politicianspeak, "never" basically means "definitely not on the horizon, at the very least". (That's for those who are honest.) And everyone agrees that it's not happening in the foreseeable future, so we might as well temporarily stop arguing about it.

PQ said that, were they to win the last election, they wouldn't have held a referendum until 2022. Legault said "never" to a referendum. Those are clearly two different statements. You can throw around some vague concept of doublespeak but that has no basis in fact. While this is an inherently speculative topic in nature, it's quite clear that "never" is different from "down the road" and are not comparable.

Originally Posted by lio45

It is a relative high. And the two parties overlap a LOT. The QS is a fresher version of the PQ. The PQ has always been very left-leaning. They seriously considered a merger, but it did not happen because QS knew they could supplant the PQ as a newer version of it, and it's always more advantageous to eliminate your opponent if you can pull that off than to have a merger with it, especially if you're considered the smaller player at the time of the negotiation.

It's not even a relative high. PQ+QS got the same percent of the vote they have for the past three elections, at roughly 30%. The only thing that has changed is the share of that percentage between the two parties. So the most ardent sovereigntist party - the one who has been associated with it for 60 years and held two referendums - tumbles in the polls and is supplanted by a more socialist party that is open to sovereignty instead of downright calling for it... and it's proof sovereignty is not dying. Righto.

Originally Posted by lio45

It definitely did not, as I'm sure you know.

Supermajority is sixty per cent of the vote. Considering staying in Canada is part of the platform for both the Liberals and the CAQ, they are both pro-federalism as far as I am concerned.

37.42 + 24.82 = 62.24

Supermajority.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

It's not even a relative high. PQ+QS got the same percent of the vote they have for the past three elections, at roughly 30%. The only thing that has changed is the share of that percentage between the two parties. So the most ardent sovereigntist party - the one who has been associated with it for 60 years and held two referendums - tumbles in the polls and is supplanted by a more socialist party that is open to sovereignty instead of downright calling for it... and it's proof sovereignty is not dying. Righto.
.

I'd say there is too much wishful thinking in your discourse. Sovereignty is losing steam in Quebec but it will never die out completely. Unless the Québécois assimilate en masse and become Anglo-Canadians comme les autres. But if they continue to remain a reasonably distinct entity there will also be potential for a resurgence of the movement/sentiment.

Just look at Catalonia where the independence movement was in the doldrums with only 15% support just a few years ago.

Stuff like this never truly dies off. It's more like a dormant volcano.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Doug

All of the Atlantic Provinces will likely face insolvency in the next ten years and neither they nor the Feds are trying to head that off, by for example requiring modest budget surpluses as a condition for federal transfers. SK likely has the brightest future as it has the strongest fiscal momentum and lots of natural resourcee. QC could also be ascendant if it keeps up the progress it has made in defanging separatism and reforming its economy. AB and ON are in the biggest trouble outside of Atlantic Canada unless they can sharply reduce spending to shrink deficits that will balloon with rising interest rates.

And BC will continue to sail along above the rest:

British Columbia’s economy is forecast to shine for the next two years as construction starts on a $40-billion liquefied natural gas project in the northern part of the province.

Last month, Royal Dutch Shell PLC and the four co-owners of LNG Canada approved the energy megaproject, which includes plans for an $18-billion export terminal in Kitimat and TransCanada Corp.’s $6.2-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline.

“The construction of the Shell-led LNG Canada project plant in Kitimat is set to positively transform the regional economy for years to come,” Bryan Yu, deputy chief economist at Central 1 Credit Union, said in a 31-page report released on Tuesday.

Mr. Yu, whose forecast covers 2019 and 2020, said northwest B.C. will benefit from the early construction phase for LNG Canada’s Kitimat terminal while northeast B.C. starts to thrive from robust drilling for natural gas.

TransCanada has been tapped to build the 670-kilometre Coastal GasLink pipeline that will transport natural gas from the North Montney play in northeast B.C. to the export terminal site in Kitimat on the west coast. Drilling is expected to increase during 2021-24, in order to feed natural gas for LNG exports to Asia by late 2024 or early 2025..

....In his outlook, Mr. Yu said British Columbia’s gross domestic product could grow in a range between 2.5 per cent and 3 per cent in each of the next two years – likely enough to be among the economic leaders in Canada, although slower than the 3.8-per-cent growth rate in B.C. in 2017...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...t-report-says/

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Doug

All of the Atlantic Provinces will likely face insolvency in the next ten years and neither they nor the Feds are trying to head that off, by for example requiring modest budget surpluses as a condition for federal transfers. SK likely has the brightest future as it has the strongest fiscal momentum and lots of natural resourcee. QC could also be ascendant if it keeps up the progress it has made in defanging separatism and reforming its economy. AB and ON are in the biggest trouble outside of Atlantic Canada unless they can sharply reduce spending to shrink deficits that will balloon with rising interest rates.

Nova Scotia has run budget surpluses of hundreds of millions over the past few years and the debt to GDP ratio there is much lower than it was one or two decades ago.

The 2017-18 surplus was $150M.

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I'd say there is too much wishful thinking in your discourse. Sovereignty is losing steam in Quebec but it will never die out completely. Unless the Québécois assimilate en masse and become Anglo-Canadians comme les autres. But if they continue to remain a reasonably distinct entity there will also be potential for a resurgence of the movement/sentiment.

Just look at Catalonia where the independence movement was in the doldrums with only 15% support just a few years ago.

Stuff like this never truly dies off. It's more like a dormant volcano.

Perhaps. I guess when I say it's dying it implies I think there will be zero percent support, which isn't exactly true. There will always be support for it, but I think it will become largely irrelevant to both the majority of Quebeckers and the nation as a whole.

[cam477]

Originally Posted by Doug

All of the Atlantic Provinces will likely face insolvency in the next ten years and neither they nor the Feds are trying to head that off, by for example requiring modest budget surpluses as a condition for federal transfers. SK likely has the brightest future as it has the strongest fiscal momentum and lots of natural resourcee. QC could also be ascendant if it keeps up the progress it has made in defanging separatism and reforming its economy. AB and ON are in the biggest trouble outside of Atlantic Canada unless they can sharply reduce spending to shrink deficits that will balloon with rising interest rates.

It would be a tough pill to swallow in NL if a province that pays into equalization was forced to run budget surpluses by the feds and other provinces that are all too happy to accept transfer payments.

That said, the problems NL is facing are serious and low oil prices have forced the government and the citizens to acknowledge the problems and start to slowly make headway. It will be a rough decade or two, but serious talk of insolvency is foolishness.

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by Doug

All of the Atlantic Provinces will likely face insolvency in the next ten years and neither they nor the Feds are trying to head that off, by for example requiring modest budget surpluses as a condition for federal transfers. SK likely has the brightest future as it has the strongest fiscal momentum and lots of natural resourcee. QC could also be ascendant if it keeps up the progress it has made in defanging separatism and reforming its economy. AB and ON are in the biggest trouble outside of Atlantic Canada unless they can sharply reduce spending to shrink deficits that will balloon with rising interest rates.

I'm not sure if Saskatchewan has strong fiscal momentum, but I'll admit I'm not an expert in the area of government finances. Those natural resources are useful when prices are high, but they've been low for some time and the province has been struggling the past few years because of it.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by whatnext

And BC will continue to sail along above the rest:

British Columbia’s economy is forecast to shine for the next two years as construction starts on a $40-billion liquefied natural gas project in the northern part of the province.

Last month, Royal Dutch Shell PLC and the four co-owners of LNG Canada approved the energy megaproject, which includes plans for an $18-billion export terminal in Kitimat and TransCanada Corp.’s $6.2-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline.

“The construction of the Shell-led LNG Canada project plant in Kitimat is set to positively transform the regional economy for years to come,” Bryan Yu, deputy chief economist at Central 1 Credit Union, said in a 31-page report released on Tuesday.

Mr. Yu, whose forecast covers 2019 and 2020, said northwest B.C. will benefit from the early construction phase for LNG Canada’s Kitimat terminal while northeast B.C. starts to thrive from robust drilling for natural gas.

TransCanada has been tapped to build the 670-kilometre Coastal GasLink pipeline that will transport natural gas from the North Montney play in northeast B.C. to the export terminal site in Kitimat on the west coast. Drilling is expected to increase during 2021-24, in order to feed natural gas for LNG exports to Asia by late 2024 or early 2025..

....In his outlook, Mr. Yu said British Columbia’s gross domestic product could grow in a range between 2.5 per cent and 3 per cent in each of the next two years – likely enough to be among the economic leaders in Canada, although slower than the 3.8-per-cent growth rate in B.C. in 2017...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...t-report-says/

Of course, getting rich off fossil fuel resources is fine when it's your province making the money. The huge fracking operations in NEBC are no environmental utopia. Has an environmental impact study been done on the whale population off Kitimat?

But good for BC, this is will benefit Alberta and the whole country too.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

Approximately one-in-five people between the ages of 19-25 consider themselves sovereigntists.

That's pretty huge, actually, when you think about it. 20% of the very youngest cohort out there (kids, essentially; actual teenagers in some cases) is openly sovereigntist. And you can be sure there are some more that are on the fence, and could change their mind if any issue with the Feds turns into something major.

If you learned that, say, 20% of the youngest Californians, and an even larger share of adult Californians, support secession from the United States, you'd say 'meh, pipe dream, going nowhere, can be ignored'? I'd be like OMG, that's MAJOR!

More than 20% of kids that age vote QS, by the way. They're not ready to proclaim they're ardently for independence, but they may very well be fine with it.

Support for independence peaked at 50%. The PQ won their first FPTP majority with ~40%. Then 'yes' in 1980 got ~40%. They won again in 1981 with slightly more support, but still in the ~40%-45% range.

Then it's been hovering in the ~35%-40% range. And it kind of still is in that ballpark.

I don't know what kind of standard you're using but even though it's somewhat weaker than it's been, that's definitely a very active and potentially successful sovereignty movement. Beyond those who answer these polls with a resounding 'yes', there are tons of people who don't (and therefore won't show up in your numbers) yet would change their mind if the current setup started to be problematic.

Out of curiosity - do you also think sovereignty is completely dead and buried for Scotland?

And I'm sorry to be this blunt but you have no clue if you genuinely think the PLQ and CAQ are both the same type of federalist party. I honestly mean you're at a level of cluelessness that is actually likely to mean these discussions are a total waste of time.