Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Very true although it bears mentioning that lots of Quebecers voted against the accord because it gave up too much power to the provinces. I'm a federalist and was living in Montreal. I voted against the Charlottetown Accord for these exact reasons; as did a good chunk of my fellow Quebecers.

There were certainly votes on separatist lines but also ones based on wanting a more centralist federation.

I know they exist but in all honesty even among federalist voters in Quebec, people who want a more centralized Canadian federation are a small minority. You mostly find that among anglophones and allophones (with the idea of using that as a counter-weight to the democratic will of the francophone majority).

But that's only maybe 15% of the population.

Even among francophone federalists the vast majority would like to see more decentralization. The main difference between them and separatists is actually how patient they are!

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Hard disagree. What would be the economic case for TGV line that stretches only 260 kms? It is not like there aren't relatively quick ways to get from Montreal to QC...heck, there are divided highways on both sides of the Fleuve St. Laurent. Quebec is still a relatively small city, in terms of making a business case for a TGV line...

Montréal-Québec City is the same distance as Rome-Florence, and the Italians built the Rome-Florence high speed line in the 1970s (fully completed in 1992). Note that Québec City is larger than Florence.

It's also slightly longer as a distance than Paris-Lille and Paris-Tours, and we built high-speed lines to Lille and Tours in the 1980s. With a French TGV, it would take 1 hour and 15 minutes from downtown Montréal to downtown Québec City. Nothing can beat that, certainly not a freeway (Google Map says it takes 2 hours and 50 minutes to drive from Montréal to Québec City, more than double what a TGV would take). Paris-Tours, which is 29 km shorter than Montréal-Québec City, has a TGV that takes only 1 hour and 5 minutes, with tickets starting at 16 euros one way. And Tours is only half the size of Québec City.

As for your comment about intermediate stops in Trois Rivières, this is is typical of North Americans who don't know how high-speed lines work. There are express services, and there are trains stopping at intermediate stations. For example between Paris and Tours there is the Vendôme TGV station. Most TGVs go straight from Paris to Tours, but a few TGVs stop at Vendôme TGV station (this allows people from Vendôme to commute and work in Paris). Montréal-Québec City would be the same: 12 TGV trains per day, with just 2 stopping in Trois Rivières, and 10 going straight from Montréal to Québec City.

The potential for economic growth (and opening all sorts of possibilities for people) would be enormous, such as people living in Montréal and working in Québec City, or vice versa. Freeways will never replace a TGV. Not to mention that a TGV could work even in blizzard and treacherous conditions in winter, whereas the freeways... Also, TGV uses carbon-free electricity, as opposed to gas-guzzling cars.

Anyway, it's so obvious that this line should exist as seen from Europe. We have smaller cities closer to each other that have high-speed lines. Where a high-speed line would make less sense would be Québec City-Saguenay (although the Spaniards would probably build it), or Montréal-Sherbrooke (again, the Spaniards might build it, but the French wouldn't).

[New Brisavoine]

That's a cab ride video of the 1 hour and 5 minutes it takes from Paris Gare du Nord to Lille Flandres, which is 30 km shorter than Montréal-Québec City, at a peak commercial speed of 300 km/h:

• Video Link

If you're interested in that, their most impressive video is the Paris-Strasbourg cab ride at 320 km/h commercial speed, the fastest in the world (except for the short maglev line from downtown Shanghai to their airport). I watched some minutes of it the other day, it was mesmerizing to see the speed through the plains of Champagne (I haven't ridden that line yet). We could run trains at 350 km/h per hour on the newest lines, but the SNCF has decided to cap the speed at 320 km/h to save energy, although Québec, with its plentiful supply of electricity, could probably run its TGVs at 350 km/h, in which case Montréal-Québec City would probably be slightly under one hour.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I know they exist but in all honesty even among federalist voters in Quebec, people who want a more centralized Canadian federation are a small minority. You mostly find that among anglophones and allophones (with the idea of using that as a counter-weight to the democratic will of the francophone majority).

But that's only maybe 15% of the population.

Even among francophone federalists the vast majority would like to see more decentralization. The main difference between them and separatists is actually how patient they are!

These generalizations are probably correct but there are also those who are opposed to decentralization because they want strong government action. Quebec has certainly done some things on its own but a lot of big changes are best done at a national level.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

These generalizations are probably correct but there are also those who are opposed to decentralization because they want strong government action. Quebec has certainly done some things on its own but a lot of big changes are best done at a national level.

Like what?

(Not criticizing your comment, I am just curious).

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

Given how light PSPP's economic, innovation and strategic industrial policies have been so far, how does it align with Macron's? For all his faults and failures to launch, Macron did have an ambitious economic agenda and innovation strategy for France.

Proof is in the pudding. France's economic growth under Macron has been as disappointing as under his predecessors. Macron is just an old-style statist, like most of our leaders since a long time ago. His reforms were essentially cosmetic, and always with a leftist tinge (don't forget that Macron comes from the French Socialist Party originally).

I think Macron would resemble more a René Lévesque in terms of economics. Certainly not a Legault, who is way more pro-business than Macron. Macron for example has kept a wealth tax, he hasn't completely suppressed it, and he has kept business taxes rather high, but above all the greatest sin of Macron is his holier-than-though Green policies which have crippled French industry and agriculture (for example, our production of beet roots has collapsed, because Macron over-transposed* EU directives regarding pesticides, and the same goes for all sorts of other agricultural productions where we used to be EU leader, and we now must import from countries without our super strict Green laws).

*EU directives do not apply directly in the EU countries, because we are not a federation; each EU nation must "transpose" (i.e. write the EU directive) in its domestic legislation; EU countries cannot under-transpose (i.e. write less than what the directive says), but they can over-transpose if they wish (i.e., say, a EU directive says pesticides A, B, and C are now outlawed in the EU, as a EU country you must outlaw these 3 pesticides, you cannot choose to outlaw only A and B, but you can over-transpose, i.e. you can outlaw A, B, and C, and also D and E, which the EU directive didn't force you to do; this is exactly what Macron has done).

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

enshrined it into the Canadian Constitution like France did

Which was the stupidest thing ever.

[Acajack]

Jean-Luc, est-ce vraiment toi?

Le 10 février 1763, anniversaire du calamiteux abandon du Québec aux Anglais. Si Trump annexe le Canada cela ne peut inclure le Québec. Évident.

https://x.com/JLMelenchon/status/1888955681618739226

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Jean-Luc, est-ce vraiment toi?

Picard????

"Make it so Number One"

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Like what?

(Not criticizing your comment, I am just curious).

Medicare required national leadership. Very doubtful we'd have universal free coverage without a federal backstop. Pensions. Maternity benefits. Child benefits. But yes Quebec introduced affordable daycare and kept University tuition low on their own.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Medicare required national leadership. Very doubtful we'd have universal free coverage without a federal backstop. Pensions. Maternity benefits. Child benefits. But yes Quebec introduced affordable daycare and kept University tuition low on their own.

Within the status quo federal system: yes, the federal role helped a lot.

If, say, Manitoba was its own country and controlled all its monies, resources and decisions, would it have these kinds of social programs? It's impossible to say. Many small countries in the world have social programs.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Within the status quo federal system: yes, the federal role helped a lot.

If, say, Manitoba was its own country and controlled all its monies, resources and decisions, would it have these kinds of social programs? It's impossible to say. Many small countries in the world have social programs.

How many of them are right next to the US? Being next to the US and having qualifications that are easily transferable (even from Quebec) naturally puts a floor on what we can pay healthcare professionals, which in turn ensures that these programs are expensive, which then limits how many such programs we can have. Europeans pay their doctors and nurses less generously and rely on the barriers to moving to the US to protect them from American style compensation demands. Governments in Canada have no such luxury.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Within the status quo federal system: yes, the federal role helped a lot.

If, say, Manitoba was its own country and controlled all its monies, resources and decisions, would it have these kinds of social programs? It's impossible to say. Many small countries in the world have social programs.

Sure you can be small as a country and still have social programs. A federation that leaves all of that to the provinces seems unlikely. There would be a rebellion against the kind of equalization that would be needed for PEI to provide it's own services.

Switzerland's Cantons certainly have more powers but the Swiss are kind of so rich it papers over a lot of potential issues. Harper's longterm vision seemed to be in that direction. Lowering taxes and withdrawing funding and oversight for health and education doesn't seem like it ends up with nearly what we have now even in Quebec. Quebec seems likely to do a lot of privatization in healthcare.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Jean-Luc, est-ce vraiment toi?

Le 10 février 1763, anniversaire du calamiteux abandon du Québec aux Anglais. Si Trump annexe le Canada cela ne peut inclure le Québec. Évident.

https://x.com/JLMelenchon/status/1888955681618739226

He's a nationalist. A hard-left nationalist, but a nationalist. If France had been Communist, for instance, they would never have given their independence to Algeria. They would have utterly crushed the Algerian independence movement, the way Stalin crushed the Chechens, the Crimean Tatars, the Balts...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

How many of them are right next to the US? Being next to the US and having qualifications that are easily transferable (even from Quebec) naturally puts a floor on what we can pay healthcare professionals, which in turn ensures that these programs are expensive, which then limits how many such programs we can have. Europeans pay their doctors and nurses less generously and rely on the barriers to moving to the US to protect them from American style compensation demands. Governments in Canada have no such luxury.

Quebec implemented pharmacare, 5$ a day daycare, low tuition, etc. all initially without federal support and as a Canadian province where half of our tax dollars go to Ottawa for spending on priorities that may or may not line up with Quebec's.

I realize it's the second-biggest province so it's not PEI but it's true that all provinces are probably not viable as hypothetical independent countries.

So maybe we shouldn't ask the question of whether the independent nation-state of PEI could do it, but rather if the independent nation-state of Atlantica (NS-PEI-NB-NL) could do it.

Quebec, Ontario, BC and Alberta all definitely could on their own.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

How many of them are right next to the US? Being next to the US and having qualifications that are easily transferable (even from Quebec) naturally puts a floor on what we can pay healthcare professionals, which in turn ensures that these programs are expensive, which then limits how many such programs we can have. Europeans pay their doctors and nurses less generously and rely on the barriers to moving to the US to protect them from American style compensation demands. Governments in Canada have no such luxury.

Yes Quebec has greater barriers. This allowed them to pay doctors less for many years when many were fleeing to the US.

Even the competition between provinces makes hugely divergent tax rates problematic.

As an Independant country Quebec would have more control but a massive loss in wealth needed to get that would make current taxation levels incapable of funding current programs. Even if Quebec stopped so called Canadian priorities like national defense, foreign aid. It's hard to see them spending less than 25% of what Canada spends on a lot of regulatory bodies.

[New Brisavoine]

^^They'd start drilling oil, for starters. Right now they have the "luxury" of being holier-than-though in terms of Green policies because they know they can benefit from transfers from Alberta, but if they are independent they'll have to become serious and look for money where it is.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

^^They'd start drilling oil, for starters. Right now they have the "luxury" of being holier-than-though in terms of Green policies because they know they can benefit from transfers from Alberta, but if they are independent they'll have to become serious and look for money where it is.

Is the future of Canada going to come down to choosing Alberta over Quebec. If Quebec is accepting transfer payments and will not allow pipelines, I have to pick Alberta over Quebec and I haven't been a fan of the way Danielle Smith is handling things. Quebec has no options, they're obviously not joining the US and without an association with the ROC I don't know if they can go it alone. I'm not facile on this subject I'd like to hear other opinions.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

So maybe we shouldn't ask the question of whether the independent nation-state of PEI could do it, but rather if the independent nation-state of Atlantica (NS-PEI-NB-NL) could do it.

Quebec, Ontario, BC and Alberta all definitely could on their own.

These discussions are typically zero-sum with people assuming that, say, independent PEI would be like today except minus equalization. But it would be such a big change that it's hard to say what PEI would be like.

I think it's safe to say that PEI being a separate country from NS/NB with no free trade over the bridge is very far-fetched.

If we're talking about the Maritimes being on their own, I don't think they are materially that different from Quebec or Ontario. There is a lot they could do on their own like focusing more on developing their natural onshore and offshore resources.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

These discussions are typically zero-sum with people assuming that, say, independent PEI would be like today except minus equalization. But it would be such a big change that it's hard to say what PEI would be like.

I think it's safe to say that PEI being a separate country from NS/NB with no free trade over the bridge is very far-fetched.

If we're talking about the Maritimes being on their own, I don't think they are materially that different from Quebec or Ontario.

Agreed. Certainly not "orders of magnitude" different, anyway.