I'm Québécois from birth (Trois Rivières). I voted in the incredibly close '95 seperation referendum. In my view, separation or sovereignty would be bad for us.
Separation is mainly predicated on the idea that Québécois are culturally distinct from the rest of Canada, and that our values would be better represented independently. We mostly speak French, and the rest of Canada is predominantly anglo (my New Brunswick Acadian mother in law would have me point out New Brunswick is officially bilingual and has many Francophones). Separatists would argue that there are substantively deeper differences, but having lived abroad in several countries over a decade and returned, any differences seem to me razor thin. We have vastly more in common than separates us. Breaking from Canada to underline these minor differences would come at a tremendous cost.
But creating a movement around identity is easy. So every now and again separatist ideas gather steam. We'll pay through the nose for a Québécois Nation and be no better off for it.
> Breaking from Canada to underline these minor differences would come at a tremendous cost.
Unfortunately, I suspect that the renewed separatist movement is making a lot of people rethink potential futures in Quebec.
For example, my wife and I would easily meet the requirements to immigrate to Quebec. We have francophone family in Montreal, we speak French (one of us natively), and we have valuable professional skills. We would have no objections to sending our kids to francophone schools. And Montreal is one of my favorite cities on the planet, despite the horrible traffic and interminable road construction.
But looking at law 66, there's a certain cruelty to the details. As I understand it, new arrivals will be forbidden from receiving any government services in a language other than French after 6 months. Montreal's respected English-speaking universities will apparently be placed under strict language rules, with the obvious intention of weakening them. And there's talk, once again, about separation from Canada.
An independent Québec without Canadian human rights guarantees, and with ever more desperate extensions to law 66, would likely weaken the robust international economy of Montreal. I suspect that even some bilingual professionals would start thinking about moving to Toronto?
One interesting part is that government offices are generally forbidden to provide English versions of written texts in most situations. There are quite a few exceptions, including tourism, communicating with foreign governments, dealing with First Nations, etc. The most important of these is a health, public security and "natural justice" exception:
> «22.3. Un organisme de l’Administration peut déroger au paragraphe 1°
de l’article 13.2 en utilisant, en plus du français, une autre langue lorsqu’il
écrit, dans les cas suivants:
> 1° lorsque la santé, la sécurité publique ou les principes de justice naturelle
l’exigent;
When dealing with new arrivals to Quebec, government offices may provide written materials in other languages for the first six months. After that, apparently all communications must be solely in French?
Quebec actually has a system for helping immigrants learn French and adapt to life in Quebec. For example, see https://www.quebec.ca/education/apprendre-le-francais/cours-.... From what I've heard, it's not great, but it's better than what's available in some countries. But cutting off all access to bilingual written materials after 6 months (which is my understanding of this text) is obviously going to make it harder to help people assimilate.
> Selon le regroupement d’entreprises technos, la nouvelle loi 96 « impose un délai irréaliste, car les nouveaux arrivants doivent jongler avec de multiples défis reliés à leur intégration au sein d’une nouvelle culture et à un changement de vie professionnelle »
Basically: You can't move house, start a demanding new job, adapt to a new culture and reach a high level of French in 6 months. This puts Quebec software companies in a tough place, in terms of recruitment. Probably they'll end up recruiting in other locations.
Born in Montreal, fully bilingual, lived here for majority of my life - came back 8 or so years ago to a peaceful situation that was broken apart because nationalist extremists freaked out when greeted with "Bonjour, Hi!".
Now I have a government openly saying other cultures don't matter:
Nope - this is a real issue inside our domestic borders. The country has two official languages but only one region that legislates one of them as second class.
Additionally - Quebec's insistence on "protecting their distinct and unique culture" tramples all over the rights of other demographics important to the formation of the country. Ex: Montreal sits on unneeded Mohawk land and the insistence on French (very Quebecois French, see numerous stories of relocating citizens of France not passing the competency requirements) but you can't get served in any Iroquoian language and in much of the north many citizens speak dialects of Cree as a first language.
So you have Indigenous people who were trampled, those who signed treaties that were then broken and/or ignored, the Metis who at least got a slightly better deal having negotiated later and spent a lot of blood, and then the Quebecois who were (basically) on the loosing side of a war & abandoned by the mother country in favour of sugar plantations in the Caribbean.
And of course they get the best deal with untenable consequences and have to be entertained every time there's a complaint that can't possibly be backed up. Whether a referendum ever actually passes the province simply can't afford to separate so, uhh, yeah. Sweetheart deals (when compared to everyone else) because, simply put, racism.
So keep some of the context in mind when Canadians complain that the province will outlaw "bonjour-hi" but you can still be served in English at nearly every fast-food joint in Montreal but might very well not get admitted to a hospital because your French isn't proficient enough.
You've crossed into name-calling and personal attack repeatedly in this thread. Can you please not do that? It's against the site guidelines and we ban that sort of account.
I'm sure you have strong feelings on the topic for completely legitimate reasons, but we need to avoid flamewar here.
Quebec was part of France for more than 200 years before it was forcibly incorporated into British North America. Most French Canadians today are descendants of 800 French women who settled in Quebec from 1663-1673: https://www.cbc.ca/2017/canadathestoryofus/most-french-canad...
Yes, it’s part of Canada now. But maintaining its independent French identity was a fundamental part of the bargain of that union.
>Unfortunately, I suspect that the renewed separatist movement is making a lot of people rethink potential futures in Quebec.
How about those Curfews and other insane covid responses?
>But looking at law 66, there's a certain cruelty to the details. As I understand it, new arrivals will be forbidden from receiving any government services in a language other than French after 6 months. Montreal's respected English-speaking universities will apparently be placed under strict language rules, with the obvious intention of weakening them. And there's talk, once again, about separation from Canada.
So lets say I go to Northsec in Montreal, awesome experience. Since I cannot prove I went to an english school. I would only be served in french if I ended up in hospital. Parles pas francais.
So what? I just die in the hospital? I've been to a quebec hospital before. I waited 16 hours in the waiting room because I didnt speak french.
Obviously I'm not going to Montreal anymore. Northsec is awesome but guess not anymore.
>An independent Québec without Canadian human rights guarantees, and with ever more desperate extensions to law 66, would likely weaken the robust international economy of Montreal. I suspect that even some bilingual professionals would start thinking about moving to Toronto?
What you are seeing as a negative the quebec separatists see as a positive.
Do you think the current crop at the top of the current separatist movement really wants to leave or do you think they are just stoking tension to maintain the crazy subsidy program we have had in place for the last several decades in the face of increasing western objection to the large transfer to Quebec (and several other provinces, most notably the maritimes and territories) and the strengthening separatist movement in the prairies driven by these transfers? Or alternatively, in conjunction with the above do you think it's tension stoking to try to maintain their seats in parliament rather than the slow decline of Quebec federal power as population shifts west? Or is it none of the above and the guys running the show over there really do think it's a good idea to leave?
It's not about power. It's about purity. The hardcore members of the independence movement bandies about what translates as "the pure wool". Today, their arguments are referred to elsewhere as "the great replacement theory".
A small minority that would have won independence if it weren't for the money and the ethnic vote [0]. Nevertheless they've been able to circle the wagons [1].
It's not about power with Canada, it's about power within the borders to ensure the "pure wool" is not just preserved but any contaminating factors eliminated
Sounds like Canada proper would benefit greatly by letting Quebec go, then? Thus they would't bear the heavy burden of these concessions that they are continuously forced to do.
It would be interesting to see polling about how the rest of Canada feels about Quebec separating now compared to 1995. I was just a child at the time and didn't want Quebec to separate, but now as an adult, I feel much more ambivalent.
The only reason I see this relevant to HN is because lots of tech companies have been opening Montreal offices over the past 20 years. We have 4 universities and most educated people are bilingual in spite of the officialdom.
However the drumbeats of separatism are banging again [1], so might be relevant considering what happened to the Montreal economy the last times these idiots were allowed to lead by their inferiority complex.
Background: Native Montrealer, proud Canadian-Italian whose ancestors built the city, and have watched it decay over the past 40 years due to paternalistic and policies and a system of government that prioritizes the opinions of the "Les régions" over Montreal (it's like if voters in the Georgia countryside fully dictated how Atlanta operates)
What Quebec nationalism has resulted in:
-Literal language police (see: pastagate [2] - this stupidity had been doubled down on)
-Codification of racism and suppression that also increases the burden on businesses (see: Bill 21 and Bill 96) [3,4]
-Blatant disregard for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the "notwithstanding clause") [5]
-Montreal was the most diverse, vibrant city in Canada, truly a global capital - this movement handed that directly to Toronto
-Montreal was the financial and tech capital of Canada - this movement handed that directly to Toronto
It's really depressing how little the wider Quebec population understands about the very serious economic consequences of separation. They don't understand that Montreal, and all it's immigrant workers, is paying for their doctors and retirement plans, the reason they can afford a big house, a boat and holidays in Cuba. Making cheap electricity and aluminium isn't enough.
There's a strong undercurrent of anti-Islamic and racial purity thinking in lots of the CAQ and PQ messaging. Frankly it's shocking how racist many of the policies are.
Meanwhile industry in general is being squeezed by lack of staff and the CAQ keep the flow of migrants to a trickle with painful bureaucracy. "Nous embauchons!"
Look at Brexit. It's not about understanding the consequences but caring. And the populace just don't care.
When you talk about nationalism, separatism and such, it's about emotions. Racism, antisimitism, the Others, that is the fuel of CAQ/PQ.
And really, people are not keen to give up quality if life to exclude immigrants, they've been suckered into believing immigrants are a burden on the state and are DESTROYING OUR CULTURE BY CAUSING MULTICULTURALISM. Yes, multiculturalism, the recognition that people of various cultures can benefit from that mixing ideas, is a curse word for the right-separatists. As if a few North African restaurants and a couple of mosques will cause Québécois culture to disintegrate.
Quebec has been next to the USA and anglophone Canada for it's entire existence and every American or Ontarian concept has been molded to suit, but has never replaced a local tradition unless the local wanted it to.
Health is primarily a cultural thing. Lifestyle, diet etc.
US is stark example how over-the-top money shovelled into healthcare may give abysmal results if culture is lacking.
Migrants may be a burden. Denmark recently published a detailed origin-based statistics if migrants are, materially, a positive or negative.
Nobody counts few restaurants as multiculturalism. And once you have significant number of outsiders... Various tensions come up. For example how Russians act in the light of Ukraine-Russia war in ex-USSR. Over here, we also had interesting issues in dealing with pandemics based on ethnicity.
In Quebec the health system (RAMQ) is culture. Everyone is incredibly proud of it (much like the NHS), while also understanding that it is underfunded and struggling. Immigrants understand they will never get a GP unless they move to the country because GP places are gerrymandered, but locals rarely experience this problem.
In Quebec, a few restaurants with foreign sounding names is enough to trigger the anti-multicultural police. God forbid they should have menu items with arabic or Chinese names.
The immigrants do all the shit jobs with low pay. But without them critical services wouldn't happen. I don't call that an immigrant problem. If you count building schools for their children a burden then yes, growth is a burden. Rich people snort cocaine like hoovers but no one counts them as part of the drug problem, but the entire Haitian ethnic group gets called drug dealers.
Why shit jobs stay with low pay? Because market economy is disrupted and there's no pressure to raise the pay.
In normal countries with social safety net (assuming Canada is one of them), those who do „shit jobs with low pay“, end up receiving from the state more than they pay in taxes.
Everything but the former Crown corporations like Air Canada and Bell moved their HQs. And the ones that stayed only did so because the federal government made sure they stayed
To be clear I'm upset about these policies because they stamped out the ideals of Montreal and have strangled the city, turning it from a truly global capital to a provincial backwater that's now more renowned as a great place for Americans to get in some underage drinking.
My National ideals, and those of the majority from Montreal, are multilingualism and multiculturalism. Runs against the ideals of the ROQ (Rest Of Quebec) and it's disheartening to see my city suffocate under rules written up by people and for people who are not actually from the city
> My National ideals, and those of the majority from Montreal, are multilingualism and multiculturalism.
Those are Anglo-influenced globalist ideals. The Francophone world is decidedly not multicultural. It’s proud of French history and culture and dedicated to protecting it.
London or Toronto are like the Android ecosystem. An eclectic if often inelegant free for all. Paris and Montreal are like iOS: carefully curated and strongly opinionated.
During its ascendency as a global capital, Montreal was a decidedly multicultural and multicultural metropolis. One that native Montrealers (read: those with deep roots here) try to cultivate.
But today's Montreal is the result of heavy-handed, paternalistic social engineering driven by an external government over the past 40 years... And is a shell of its former self. One that is going to be further hollowed unless these laws are reversed.
While I'm not OP, I can earnestly say I'm proud to be Canadian. We are a liberal multicultural democracy, with beautiful natural vistas and nice people and I am proud of that fact. I'm proud of the imagined Canadian identity of polite and hard-working. Are there thing I don't like? Sure, but I think having full-throated pride for "Canadian values" is not a bad thing. And I also think by doing so, I can try and reclaim this from being political/partisan. Especially after the Canadian flag has been used so heavily in political protests, I think it's all the more important to re-affirm that being proudly Canadian is not a partisan decision.
I don’t see anything about “racism” in 3 and 4. The first is about excluding religious symbols from public, which is what France does, and is an extremely left-wing notion. Certainly not what folks in “Georgia” would do. And the second is about mandatory French education. Explain to me where the “racism” is.
But Catholic religious symbols are not excluded -- they're everywhere, but it's called 'history' and 'culture'. The lengths CSDM builders go to to leave a giant crucifix on a school building undisturbed even when demolishing the rest are truly noteworthy.
The point is that the crucifix was removed from the most symbolic place it could be removed from. If thats not a strong, consistent signal that Quebec wants religions out of the public institutions, then what is?
Removing the rest of them? Changing the names of all the places named after Catholic Saints? Not having the municipality put up Christmas decorations every year? You know, actually taking action to do that?
They only took down the cross in the National Assembly after backlash and calls of hypocrisy. Originally Legault wanted it to stay up. That alone says to me how BS the whole thing is.
> Changing the names of all the places named after Catholic Saints? Not having the municipality put up Christmas decorations every year?
But that stuff really is "history and culture" rather than "public endorsement of religion."
People in my home country would never tolerate foreign Christians coming in and demanding that the state stop celebrating Eid or changing place names. People are entitled to their heritage, and shouldn’t have to erase it to accommodate newcomers.
Supposedly it's Quebecers themselves who want reglious symbols out of the public sphere. Not immigrants or outsiders. Crosses and Christmas trees are reglious symbols, sure there is some "history and culture" there but there is also "history and culture" in Confederate monuments and places named after them. If Quebecers are serious about removing religious symbols in the public sphere they should take steps to actually do so. It's picking and choosing what religious symbols to have around.
> Christmas trees are reglious symbols, sure there is some "history and culture" there there
We had a Christmas tree every year growing up in America as immigrants from a Muslim country. When I visit Tokyo in December, which is in a non-Christian country, there are Christmas trees in all the malls. Christmas trees are the archetypal examples of religious symbols that have turned into cultural symbols.
> there is also "history and culture" in Confederate monuments and places named after them.
To be clear (which Americans get really diverted into believing) this is not about banning Christmas or forcing people to say Happy Holidays. This is the hypocrisy of refusing to let Muslim women cover their hair if they are a public servant (and the Govt sector is large, including pre-school workers, cleaners, teachers, council office workers, librarians, road sweepers, health workers, archivists, town planners, etc) but still having profoundly religious symbols in places like schools, hospitals and other Govt buildings. Also cultural matters, e.g. an incredible refusal to acknowledge that people are fasting during Ramadan.
The use of saint names is unavoidable, a reminder of how the Church used to control everything. It would be a powerful statement of actual secularism if some schools were renamed, even some streets. But most people don't care, they just stopped going to mass and kicked the priests out of schools, job done. Secularism is now code for xenophobia.
The process to remove religions from public institutions started 50-70 years ago. It's a process, and its going to take a long time, as there is 400 years of history to deal with. Saying that the whole process is BS because there was some hesitation, or because there are still streets named after catholic Saints is just a logical fallacy.
About religon: you are correct, it's not racism, it's a different approach to multi-culturalism. The problem is, the ROC is intolerant and only consider that one valid approach to multi-culturalism exists: their own. Anything else is "racist".
[3] exclusively targets non-Christian symbols and came after a campaign of primarily non-city folk freaking out because immigrants are different - most infamously Herouxville where the town published a manifesto
warning immigrants against "stoning and burning women. It included, too, an explanation of the importance of Christmas trees." [1]. The Catholic symbology remains in the officialdom - see the giant cross that sits atop Montreal, and the crosses that were never removed from the public schools, or many provincial offices. Not to mention it's OK to wear a crucifix.
[4] goes way beyond education. Montreal is a functionally bilingual city and those of us from here speak "franglais", a mix of the two and have no issue switching. This new law massively restricts access to: education, medicare, legal services, to name a few in the official language of your choice. It even gives powers to the language police to, for example, raid a law or medical office, get access to confidential documents to ensure you are only being served in French [2]. I live in a nation with 2 official languages in a city where the majority of people are bilingual and happy to serve in either language- and Quebec just effectively made one of those languages illegal. How is this is not discrimination?
Georgia-Atlanta is an analogy.
The rural areas are 99% white, unilingual francophone - a group who genuinely believe bilingualism and multiculturalism is a problem - Montreal's two key, unique strengths and defining characteristics. If we had representation by population, these would be non-issues but because the rural areas are heavily weighted, the ruling CAQ has a supermajority after winning only 37% of the vote.[3]
You’re grafting an Americanism onto Canadian politics and it doesn’t fit. White folks in Georgia may discriminate against Black folks in Georgia even though the two groups share a culture and language. That’s racism.
A distinct cultural group seeking to avoid cultural or linguistic change created by an influx of outsiders isn’t “racism.” It’s a human right for distinct ethnocultural groups to seek political autonomy on that basis: https://unpo.org/article/4957. Quebec is by its very nature a province for French speaking descendants of French immigrants to Canada. Québécois are perfectly entitled to say it should stay that way. It’s alien to modern Anglo notions of multiculturalism, but that doesn’t make it “racism.”
In no case am I grafting Americanism onto Canadian politics. I'm using an analogy to illustrate to non-Canadians how outsiders (nationalist extremists from the ROQ) are able to impose their values and views on the multicultural, multilingual city of Montreal and it has systematically strangled the city since 1976.
Or do you have another explanation for the population , capital, and cultural flight that occurred over the 80s 90s that we have never recovered from?
Reducing all conflicts between different cultural groups to “racism” is an Americanism. “Racism” is a specific concept that explains why, for example, British Americans in Georgia might feel more affinity for German Americans in Indiana than more culturally similar Black Americans in Georgia.
That’s not what’s happening in Quebec. It’s not like rural Quebecois are welcoming of Anglo Canadians either. They simply oppose multiculturalism, just like China or Japan or France itself.
Racism plays a major role here [1,2], and it's certainly a motivation for Bill 21 at least. Remember, this is the ultimate culmination of a village writing a handbook for immigrants that included not eating babies, like they do in their home country [3].
Bill 96 is a direct violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, so you're right it's not racist, just a denial of my guaranteed rights as a Canadian Citizen. Ignoring First Nations, of course, many of whom speak neither French nor English. If you do count them, then Bill 96 can also be considered racist
It tends to be discriminatory towards Sihks, Muslims and Orthodox Jews, who all have head coverings as important religious garb, basically excluding them from government jobs.
I understand how it can be perceived this way. However, did you look at Quebec history? You will find that Quebec was very religious until 50-70 years ago. Education was provided by members of catholic institutions. At that point in time, teachers were wearing their religious uniform. Quebec made the decision to re-take ownership of the education system and to get the religions out of there. In the beginning, religious people were still providing the educuation, but they were asked to stop wearing religious symbols.
The current movement is a continuity of the work that was started 50-70 years ago to get religious symbols out of public institutions, and in that sense, it's coherent.
I'd argue that it's the opposite, there's are a lot of discriminations against Québec from the english side, it's very apparent online and it's a bit shocking to watch to be honest.
Those discriminations for sure helping the independence movement.
Besides criticism of laws like Bill 96 and 21 what discrimination is there? I don't think most English Canadians really care what Quebec and Quebecers do unless their pushing bad discriminatory laws. I think you'd see the same push back from the rest of Canada if Alberta decided to implement similar policies.
Most people? Sure I agree. But you can't really deny the degrading statements online, I've seen very harsh words against them and surveys against discrimination in Québec are showing a growing feeling of discrimination.
As a Québecois, I have a theory about séparatisme: it is a clever ploy to get both levels of government to pander to Québec. The Federal and Provincial governments are always trying to outdo each other with concessions, largesse and favourable treatment.
Québec should not separate because the Sûreté du Québec (Provincial Police) are voyous (bums).
Personally I would not want to live in a land where I could not call the Rocky Mountains mine.
Being a Québecois, I am divided on this issue. To heavily summarize :
Pro :
- Only one level of corruption instead of two to keep in check.
- A (sometime too zealous) protection of the language.
Against :
- Less international political weight
- Companies forced to to business in french by law might gtfo since it incur costs
- Weak military power (would we stay in NATO?)
Globally :
Our roads are already crap. Healthcare is free but your experience in quality of service might vary. We already selling our natural resources like there is no tomorrow and we store nuclear waste here too.
As someone who grew up on the Ontario-Quebec border in Northern Ontario, to highlight why this is absurd you just need to realize that roads and healthcare are a provincial thing. Quebec is already responsible for funding those things. Furthermore, Quebec receives equalization payments from the rest of Canada because they run such a deficit. If they cut themselves off, things would only get worse. The two levels of corruption doesn't make sense, Quebec would obviously set up its own provinces.
I also think that the language would suffer because Canada is able to convince all American companies to translate everything because the other 30 million wallets are worth it. I highly suspect you would get the France version if they demanded only French products which, for those that don't know, would be perceived as more of a personal affront than American English being pushed onto the UK. At best, they would continue to get the Canadian version. In which case, what exactly was achieved?
For the roads, I know it is totally on our own. This is why I put it in the "global" section... As soon as you get in Ontario, roads gets better. Healthcare was also in the global section. I know about péréquation and that Québec is a net receiver too. The "global" section is just sad state of affairs with no pro/cons separatism points.
The 2 level of corruption that I refer too is probably just the sponsorship scandal that left me a bitter taste of how my federal tax dollars were spent.
For the language though, I am not sure. Even Air Canada got fined a few times because they did not respect bilingualism.
To your last point, are most American shows aired in Quebec translated into Quebecois French? I’m from Ontario and had no idea, I always assumed they watched the France version. That’s very fascinating!
Actually, media is probably the only thing that wouldn't change because there are explicit English and French channels and the French channels probably pay for the translations themselves. I meant for all the signage of products like nutrition labels and product descriptions. It would be like saying "aluminum foil" instead of "aluminium foil" which is literally nothing. Except, these people separated for the explicit reason to product "aluminium foil". Right now, companies redesign their entire packaging for Canada as a whole to include both official languages (as it is a requirement) and the marginal price of doing the Canadian French translation is minuscule. If Quebec separated, I think they would either receive the Canadian version or the French (from France) version. In either case, the only thing they've done is removed themselves from having any influence on their language. The other possibility is I suppose companies would get around to the Quebec version (if required) after Hungary and Israel. I'm not sure separatists understand what that would mean.
At the time of the referendum, at least, I recall that Quebec was a net recipient of federal funds, i.e. was not economically self-sufficient. I always assumed that played a role in the way the vote went: people expecting the Quebec economy to nosedive on independence.
Full disclosure, I am a Quebecker who is against separation. A lot of the debate is around the protection of the French language, which gets stretched out in every political issue.
One thing which wasn't mentioned is how unique Quebec's position is geographically. There are few regions which are as surrounded by another dominant language. I think just this phenomenon puts pressure on conserving the French language.
I also believe that this makes us stick out like a sore thumb in North America. I will regularly see comment sections riddled with ill informed negative comments about Quebec.
Another thing to keep in mind is that in our history, English colonial forces tried to assimilate French people on a few occasions (search for "Durham Report" as an example). I do believe that a lot of trauma has been passed on through generations.
Finally, I believe the Federal government doesn't do enough for French speakers inside and outside Quebec. As a result, the separatist movement gives a voice to French people who feel unheard. This just results in political and cultural tensions.
While we debate this issue, the people who benefit the least are indigenous people. Their case is politicized on both sides and legislations rarely benefit them.
Anyone interested in this subject should watch Radio-Canada/CBC excellent documentary Breaking Point part [1] & part [2]. It make a good job of showing both side motivation in the 95 referendum and also the international politics in trying to get France to recognize a Yes vote.
Quebec is represented by the CAQ at provincial level who are nationalist/separatist. Bloc at federal level who are also separatists. Quebec quite clearly wants to separate. Technically speaking if we were to have a nationwide referendum on 'should canada kick quebec to the curb' it would be overwhelmingly in favour of throwing quebec out.
So what's going on? If you go back 75 years. Quebec due to the language barrier has economic isolation. This makes them quite poor. Quebec has traditionally been very poor compared to the rest of the continent. To 'help', on average Quebec receives 40-75 billion more than they pay in taxes.
More importantly, lets say Quebec separates. Quebec is so screwed. They will be short so much money they effectively would be immediately forced to close all of their schools including post-secondary. AND immediately close all public healthcare. That's how much money Quebec would have to raise in taxes just to break even after losing Canada. Then they have to go further. What you think you dont need a military? Quebec has no trade agreements or alliances. They basically have to more than double their tax burden. I wonder if the people of Quebec feel like they are heavily undertaxed?
Actually they wouldn’t. There is no way in hell that the US allows a foreign power to attack Quebec. That area is too strategically sensitive to the US.
>CAQ is not separatist and bloc has barely any representative. Seperation is at a all time low.
I do understand legault has said he's not separatist. Actions > words. Quebec Liberals have been quite vocal that the CAQ are separatists. As an objective ontario person I say the CAQ are separatist. Let's not even bring up Trudeau and western alienation.
In terms of Bloc representation. They have what 50% of the seats in Quebec. Sure sounds like representation to me. Though yes I do agree separatism is quite low, but that seems to have far more to do with the reality that Quebec becomes poor.
>The level of transfer payment is closer to 10b than 75b..
If you're looking solely at 'equalization payments' it's around $13 billion. That's not the only money going to Quebec.
Canada Health Transfer is another $10B to Quebec.
Canada social transfer is another $3B to quebec.
There's $26 billion in straight up $ transfers.
Now you also have to look at other federal expenditures. Quebec pays X$/year in taxes but the fed pays for lots of things within Quebec. CBSA, Military, etc. The lowest it has ever been is about $20billion in net difference. That is to say, Canadians paying Quebec $20 billion on top of that $26 billion.
Canadians have been giving Quebec a ton of money for decades and it's also getting worse. Though the table that I use hasn't been updated because of covid. So I don't know what this years' data looks like.
Fundamentally Quebec is basically incapable of separating.
I am not sure we should care how a political party defines another.. CAQ are definitely against pushing sovereignty. Bloc did better than I remembered, good for them.
Outside of equalization, that federal money comes from our taxes. Besides, if Quebec is so much poorer that the ROC it is because of inequalities that is the impetus for seperatist to begin with.
You sound like the beating husband that rejoice because the beaten wife can't afford to leave.
>I am not sure we should care how a political party defines another..
I'm not a liberal and I'm not from Quebec. In fact I would venture to guess the Quebec Liberals are the antithesis of my politics but I agree with their assessment. Actions speak louder than words. CAQ are separatists.
>Outside of equalization, that federal money comes from our taxes. Besides, if Quebec is so much poorer that the ROC it is because of inequalities that is the impetus for seperatist to begin with.
Lets break it down. Quebecois give Canada say $140 billion in taxes and then receive back $200 billion in some manner.
The day Quebec separates there is such a huge deficit that public healthcare and education entirely shuts down. It's not even a matter of taking on the debt, Quebec would not be able to take on that debt without some currency backing. This isn't practical. You would have instant massive layoffs and riots destroying the new country. Lets say though that we just fast forward through the immediate consequences. Quebec's income taxes rise to about 45% in lowest bracket. Probably about 65% in higher brackets.
You get to year 1 of the new quebec nation, you've printed new currency because you cant join Euro like france and the Franc probably isnt an option. You certainly cant keep the CAD. You could go USD but much easier to just go new digital currency.
How much business is lost though? How many companies pull out of Quebec? Quite a few right? So you still have an even bigger deficit.
Quebec can't leave Canada. Quebec can't see the West leave Canada neither. Quebec should be best friends with Alberta. Energy East should be top most priority for Quebec.
But then you say Inequalities are the impetus. Totally. We can look at the 1950s and see what it was You are surrounded by people who dont speak french. This inequality is a huge problem. It left Quebec very poor.
>You sound like the beating husband that rejoice because the beaten wife can't afford to leave.
Woah, wait a second. You feel Canada, the people who have given Quebec a trillion $ of free money over decades is the equivalent of a domestic violence husband?
That's extremely offensive to me. It's literally the opposite. It is Quebec who is 'beating' the rest of Canada. SNC Lavalin? Quebec. Trudeau and Western alienation... Quebec's fault. Energy East cancellation? Quebec. Banning muslims from the province... from their jobs... that's only Quebec. Covid curfews, Quebec. Must speak french to get treatment in a hospital, quebec.
Interesting fact about how slowly things change. I drank a weissbier from Munich yesterday, and French language section on the can included instructions for Quebec explicitly. English one for Canada had instructions in both English and French
Even more interesting, if it went through the Western half of Canada would effectively be cut off from the bulk of the countries population and economic centers. For this reason, the Governor of Alberta at the time had planned to cede to the US had the referendum been a success. At that point there probably would have been something of a domino effect, with the other Western provinces doing the same.
> if it went through the Western half of Canada would effectively be cut off from the bulk of the countries population and economic centers.
What? Quebec is east of Ontario, so the entire west of Canada is still connected to Ontario by land. Only lightly populated, economically minuscule (but gorgeous) eastern provinces would be cut off.
> For this reason, the Governor of Alberta at the time had planned to cede to the US had the referendum been a success.
Premiere of Alberta. Albertans threaten this regularly when one or another of their extractive projects doesn’t get approved.
> Governor of Alberta at the time had planned to cede to the US
Ex-Albertan here: this is false, there has never been a plan to "cede to the US". It would be extremely politically distasteful in Alberta to cede to the USA, such a plan would be political suicide.
>Ex-Albertan here: this is false, there has never been a plan to "cede to the US".
In 1990 the premier of Nova Scotia said that Atlantic Canada would have "no choice" but to join the US (<http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-05-03/news/900205075...>) if Quebec were to leave. Saskatchewan in both 1980 and 1995 evaluated the possibility of also seceding, and/or seeking US statehood (<http://web.archive.org/web/20140829140952/http://www.thestar...>), on the event of a "Yes" vote in the Quebec referendum those years, in part because "Atlantic Canada would be 'an island'". It would only have been prudent for some or all of the other provincial governments to have made similar plans in secret.
>It would be extremely politically distasteful in Alberta to cede to the USA, such a plan would be political suicide.
Are you so sure about that, after the last few years of Alberta/Trudeau 2.0 conflicts fueling the longstanding sense of Western alienation? Remember, Re Secession lays out a legal path for secession.
Yeah I'm sure about that. I mean never say never, but I would place a heavy wager on Alberta not ceding to the USA in the next 100 years. You're right that there is a strong anti-Trudeau, anti-Federal sentiment in the province, but that in no way implies a greater desire to be a part of the USA than Canada.
Independence, and a union of the 3 prairie provinces into a separate nation? There's a slim possibility. A state in the US? No way.
Could you clarify? Wouldn't this only cut Newfoundland and Labrador off from the rest of Canada? Can't see how this would affect Western Canada's access to the population/economic centre which is basically just Ontario, and to a lesser degree BC and Alberta itself. (Excepting Quebec, which I guess all of Canada would be cut off from to the same degree in this scenario).
Well this is awkward, I'm having difficulty finding the source where I first learned of it. But I have found this nice booklet that collected a fair number of interesting first hand documents.
I'm certainly misremembering details, and can't afford to spend any more time on it now, but I distinctly recall some high level official (premier, governor, chairman, whatever) revealed in an interview many years after the fact they had seriously planed on cessation had the yes side won.
Separation is mainly predicated on the idea that Québécois are culturally distinct from the rest of Canada, and that our values would be better represented independently. We mostly speak French, and the rest of Canada is predominantly anglo (my New Brunswick Acadian mother in law would have me point out New Brunswick is officially bilingual and has many Francophones). Separatists would argue that there are substantively deeper differences, but having lived abroad in several countries over a decade and returned, any differences seem to me razor thin. We have vastly more in common than separates us. Breaking from Canada to underline these minor differences would come at a tremendous cost.
But creating a movement around identity is easy. So every now and again separatist ideas gather steam. We'll pay through the nose for a Québécois Nation and be no better off for it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Quebec_referendum