Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Ozabald]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Milton Friedman or Adam Smith might call this a "win-win".

Though BTW, all of the Maritimers I've known who worked in the oil patch were Alberta residents and tax filers from what I can ascertain.

I mean, you'd be crazy not to be if you could:

https://www.eytaxcalculators.com/en/...alculator.html

Absolutely, from an income tax perspective, being taxed in Alberta is much better than in any of the Atlantic provinces. It is interesting that Newfoundland, of all provinces, has its top income tax rate kick in at $1,103,478. It's the only province with a seven figure income tax bracket. Alberta has the second highest income tax bracket, which kicks in at $355,845.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Justanothermember

Calling any province a 'leech' for being on the receiving end of the equalization program shows how little that person knows about the true intention and value of the program itself.

Keep in mind that this only started because a Manitoban started panning Quebec for siphoning off too much equalization money. There would have been exactly zero reason to point out the fact that Manitoba is a much bigger leech than Quebec, if it hadn't been for him starting that exact conversation. I rest my case: when you live in a glass house leech province, you don't throw stones.

[Justanothermember]

Originally Posted by lio45

Keep in mind that this only started because a Manitoban started panning Quebec for siphoning off too much equalization money. There would have been exactly zero reason to point out the fact that Manitoba is a much bigger leech than Quebec, if it hadn't been for him starting that exact conversation. I rest my case: when you live in a glass house, you don't throw stones.

I get it, and that Manitoban needed to shut their mouth to stop the ignorance. But now this thread has degenerated in a city/province bashfest. And as a mod, I would think you would know better than to contribute to that nonsense.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Justanothermember

I get it, and that Manitoban needed to shut their mouth to stop the ignorance. But now this thread has degenerated in a city/province bashfest. And as a mod, I would think you would know better than to contribute to that nonsense.

I would draw the line where "Manitoba gets substantial per capita equalization, and that amount is on the rise too" is not hate speech, but yeah, you're correct, point taken, I'll consider Hecate got enough of his "eye for an eye" from me at this point, and I'll pivot to being more professional from this point on.

[kool maudit]

We have read all of these things before. It's slop at this point, warring AIs could act it out for a million years with a million Aislin-esque cartoons.

Being a political collective, Quebec is never going to somehow respond to charges of selfishness or perfidy as an individual would.

It's going to seek its advantage in its context. If this again manifests as the desire for political independence to enough people, you'll see the movement again.

I've said before that I think this could happen in an environment where a larger redrawing of North America's borders energizes the movement in an atmosphere if high volatility. I think this remains unlikely, but if it were to happen it could come about following fractures in the US due to protracted civil unrest and a breakdown of Washington's authority over certain states or blocs of states.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

As I alluded to above a soft border isn't really possible. Even if Canada was completely generous in the sense of agreeing to whatever Quebec wants as long as it doesn't direct hurt the rest of Canada just look at Brexit. Like Brexit the you can have your cake and eat it too fantasy is a good sales pitch.

The UK chose to leave a common market. That's completely different from the secession from a country. The EU is not a country and the UK was not a province of that country. You can secede from a country and maintain a customs union with that country. There are several historical examples: Norway after seceding from Sweden, Luxembourg after seceding from Belgium, Ireland after seceding from the UK. Luxembourg even kept the same currency as Belgium.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

The UK chose to leave a common market. That's completely different from the secession from a country. The EU is not a country and the UK was not a province of that country. You can secede from a country and maintain a customs union with that country. There are several historical examples: Norway after seceding from Sweden, Luxembourg after seceding from Belgium, Ireland after seceding from the UK. Luxembourg even kept the same currency as Belgium.

Those are under a very different world economy. In terms of trade UK was a province of the UK. In some ways provinces have more policy divergence than EU member states. We don't have to let professionals move or construction companies bid no contracts.

That said theoretically you are right. We can just keep the current arrangements. But we can't get rid of current inter-provincial barriers because removing all of them isn't in the interest of some provinces so why should they just give them up. Not being part of the same country would make this altruism even less likely. Quebec letting Canada set standards and trade and moneteary policy without having a say in order to have their own flag and passport doesn't seem like real soverigntly. Even current divergence in tax rates and social policies could be hard to maintain without any say in national level policies.

[MolsonExport]

In any event, Quebec sovereignty is not at all imminent, and very likely will not come to pass in the foreseeable future (beyond which, who knows what will happen in any given place?). The "winning conditions" are not in place.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Those are under a very different world economy. In terms of trade UK was a province of the UK. In some ways provinces have more policy divergence than EU member states. We don't have to let professionals move or construction companies bid no contracts.

The UK wanted to leave a common market, trade union, and customs area, because Brexiters believed they would fare better alone in terms of being able to sign their own free trade agreements with the rest of the world. They were proven wrong.

The Québec sovereignists want Québec to become an independent country, but they do not want to leave the trade and customs union that exists with the ROC. That's completely different from what the Brexiters wanted. What's new is the PQ leader now wants to leave the currency union that exists with the rest of Canada (which is probably sensible, because an independent Québec would have no more say over the Canadian dollar), but I've never heard he wants to also leave the trade and customs union that exists with the rest of the Canada (which would be stupid as so much trade takes place between Québec and the ROC, both ways, so both parties have in interest in keeping that trade and customs union after Québec secession).

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Quebec letting Canada set standards and trade and moneteary policy without having a say in order to have their own flag and passport doesn't seem like real soverigntly. Even current divergence in tax rates and social policies could be hard to maintain without any say in national level policies.

An independent Québec would have one quarter the population of a rump Canada. It's not exactly the same situation as tiny Switzerland or Norway who can only be rule-takers in their trade arrangements with the EU. The comparable situation would be a country the size of Japan forming a customs and trade union with the EU. In such a situation, obviously the terms would have to be negotiated by both sides, it couldn't be just the UE/ROC imposing their terms on Japan/Québec as the EU currently does with tiny outsiders like Switzerland or Norway.

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

In any event, Quebec sovereignty is not at all imminent, and very likely will not come to pass in the foreseeable future (beyond which, who knows what will happen in any given place?). The "winning conditions" are not in place.

Poll tracker for sovereignty support:

https://338canada.com/quebec/referendum.htm

Slight decrease in support for the OUI observed recently, despite the PQs lead in polling.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Zeej

Poll tracker for sovereignty support:

https://338canada.com/quebec/referendum.htm

Slight decrease in support for the OUI observed recently, despite the PQs lead in polling.

Interesting webpage.

The graph at the bottom of the page doesn't really show what you say. What is visible is a rise in the OUI vote intentions (and decline in the NO vote intentions) until the beginning of Spring 2023, and then essentially no change in voting intentions since Spring 2023, with just a modest uptick for the NON vote intentions in the most recent polls that doesn't seem statistically significant. From Spring 2023 to now the big picture is essentially a flat line, no change in voting intentions.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

The UK wanted to leave a common market, trade union, and customs area, because Brexiters believed they would fare better alone in terms of being able to sign their own free trade agreements with the rest of the world. They were proven wrong.

The Québec sovereignists want Québec to become an independent country, but they do not want to leave the trade and customs union that exists with the ROC. That's completely different from what the Brexiters wanted. What's new is the PQ leader now wants to leave the currency union that exists with the rest of Canada (which is probably sensible, because an independent Québec would have no more say over the Canadian dollar), but I've never heard he wants to also leave the trade and customs union that exists with the rest of the Canada (which would be stupid as so much trade takes place between Québec and the ROC, both ways, so both parties have in interest in keeping that trade and customs union after Québec secession).


An independent Québec would have one quarter the population of a rump Canada. It's not exactly the same situation as tiny Switzerland or Norway who can only be rule-takers in their trade arrangements with the EU. The comparable situation would be a country the size of Japan forming a customs and trade union with the EU. In such a situation, obviously the terms would have to be negotiated by both sides, it couldn't be just the UE/ROC imposing their terms on Japan/Québec as the EU currently does with tiny outsiders like Switzerland or Norway.

The UK was 15% of GDP. Quebec 20%+. The promise was to stay in the customs union and only exit the political part of the EU. The UK quickly learned if they stay in the customs union they will have to follow their rules. While Quebec soverignty isn't currently about setting their own rules that would quickly become important. Is Canada going to keep paying Quebec to stay in a customs union. Obviously not. If we are in a customs union that means Canada decides how we renogiate NAFTA. We might consult Quebec but they won't have a veto. Without Quebec the buyout for dairy farmers becomes maybe a smart move. A broke Quebec would have to match the buyout or watch dairy farmers go broke. Or more easily annouce we are leaving NAFTA and setting up a border. All this is in a friendly divorce whereas in reality it would be more acrimonious than Brexit. The mood in Canada would be vengeance and lose lose agreements.

[Zeej]

I said recently - referring to the last few polls and largely coinciding with PSPPs rise in the polls dating to the start of 2024, roughly.

Also, the graph clearly shows the polling discrepancy between Léger's and Pallas' polls.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

The UK was 15% of GDP. Quebec 20%+. The promise was to stay in the customs union and only exit the political part of the EU. The UK quickly learned if they stay in the customs union they will have to follow their rules. While Quebec soverignty isn't currently about setting their own rules that would quickly become important. Both sides was exactly the argument that Brexiteers made. Is Canada going to keep paying Quebec to stay in a customs union. Obviously not. If we are in a customs union that means Canada decides how we renogiate NAFTA. We might consult Quebec but they won't have a veto. Without Quebec the buyout for dairy farmers becomes maybe a smart move. A broke Quebec would have to match the buyout or watch dairy farmers go broke. Or more easily annouce we are leaving NAFTA and setting up a border. All this is in a friendly divorce whereas in reality it would be more acrimonious than Brexit. The mood in Canada would be vengeance and lose lose agreements.

I strongly doubt it as we're not talking about a situation with lots of blood spilled historically.

The mood would be cool and calculated, but not hot-headed.

I mean, even Armenia and Azerbaijan trade a bit.

Ontario (which would be 50% of Canada if Quebec left) in particular has a lot to lose if it can no longer trade with Quebec.

Will it be any consolation to Weston when they lose a quarter of their market, that Quebec dairy giant Agropur lost three quarters of theirs?

Think about how economics works, people.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

In any event, Quebec sovereignty is not at all imminent, and very likely will not come to pass in the foreseeable future (beyond which, who knows what will happen in any given place?). The "winning conditions" are not in place.

You're right but there is still a lot stuff in the tea leaves that's worth paying attention to.

- PSPP is a very good, charismatic politician. We know what effect that can have, as we both remember the turnaround when Lucien Bouchard started playing a bigger role in the 1995 referendum campaign.

- Where sovereignty is now in terms of support is where it was not that long before the 1995 referendum.

- There are more and more disputes between Ottawa and Quebec on a whole bunch of issues, and François Legault's third way to seek more autonomy within Canada is mostly about him getting the door slammed in his face.

- Canada in general seems quite lost in terms of what it is and where it is going as a country.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

The UK was 15% of GDP. Quebec 20%+. The promise was to stay in the customs union and only exit the political part of the EU. The UK quickly learned if they stay in the customs union they will have to follow their rules. While Quebec soverignty isn't currently about setting their own rules that would quickly become important. Is Canada going to keep paying Quebec to stay in a customs union. Obviously not. If we are in a customs union that means Canada decides how we renogiate NAFTA. We might consult Quebec but they won't have a veto. Without Quebec the buyout for dairy farmers becomes maybe a smart move. A broke Quebec would have to match the buyout or watch dairy farmers go broke. Or more easily annouce we are leaving NAFTA and setting up a border. All this is in a friendly divorce whereas in reality it would be more acrimonious than Brexit. The mood in Canada would be vengeance and lose lose agreements.

Québec is far larger relative to Canada than the UK was relative to the EU. It is also far more integrated with the rest of Canada. So the situations are absolutely not comparable. The EU could afford to be harsh with the UK because they didn't need the UK as much as the UK needed the EU. The UK was already an outlier in the EU. Québec, on the other hand, is right in the middle of Canada, so integrated with Ontario that there is no way a rump Canada could exert the same pressure on an independent Québec as the EU exerted on the UK. If huge trade barriers were erected along the Québec-Ontario border, this would crush many businesses in Ontario, and the ROC being the Anglo-Saxon country that it is, where business trumps all other considerations, there is no way a prime minister in Ottawa would not listen to Ontario businesses and decide to destroy all the trade between rump Canada and independent Québec.

EU countries, on the other hand, were much more relaxed. First of all in continental Europe business does not trump all other considerations, and secondly the continental EU countries depended much less on trade with the UK than ROC does with Québec, so the governments of Germany, France, etc were quite relaxed about the possibility of big trade barriers over the Channel.

[Nashe]

Like a lot of things, it's all theoretical until the collective musters the gumption to find out what will happen. A LOT of variables in play that we are only guessing at.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

The UK was 15% of GDP. Quebec 20%+. The promise was to stay in the customs union and only exit the political part of the EU. The UK quickly learned if they stay in the customs union they will have to follow their rules. While Quebec soverignty isn't currently about setting their own rules that would quickly become important. Is Canada going to keep paying Quebec to stay in a customs union. Obviously not. If we are in a customs union that means Canada decides how we renogiate NAFTA. We might consult Quebec but they won't have a veto. Without Quebec the buyout for dairy farmers becomes maybe a smart move. A broke Quebec would have to match the buyout or watch dairy farmers go broke. Or more easily annouce we are leaving NAFTA and setting up a border. All this is in a friendly divorce whereas in reality it would be more acrimonious than Brexit. The mood in Canada would be vengeance and lose lose agreements.

I don’t know that it’s worth it that much to speculate how much influence one party or the other would have.
Bilateral negotiations between sovereign parties are just that: bilateral and sovereign. Each party is always free to walk away from the table if they wish.
In terms of reaching a satisfactory agreement, Canada has historically obtained decent agreements with the US has it not? In spite of the US being much larger and more powerful.
I think this type of leverage and the right to walk away if something doesn’t serve your interest is something that Quebec sovereignists would like to have, whereas right now in the Canadian context they can’t walk away from the table if something isn’t in their interest, either internationally or within Canada itself.
Whatever the broader Canada decides is binding on Quebec and of course all provinces.

[SignalHillHiker]

Interacted today with someone from the francophone region of western Newfoundland whose surname was Benwah and I'm still not recovered.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Interacted today with someone from the francophone region of western Newfoundland whose surname was Benwah and I'm still not recovered.

Spelled that way?