Do You Think Canada Should Honor Quebec's Choice if it Decides to Secede?

[RiverSalado]

The leader of the Bloc Quebecois has a large possibility of becoming Quebec's next premier because the Bloc Quebecois has a large lead in the polls over its other aniti-secessionist oponents, the leader of the Bloc Quebecois has said that if he becomes the next premier of Quebec, he will push for a referendum on the issue of Quebec's independence from Canada, in the last such referendum in 1995, Quebec stayed as part of Canada only by a razor-thin margin, if a referendum ever gets pushed through and Quebec decides by a narrow majority to secede from Canada, do you think that Canadians should honor the wishes of the voters and allow Quebec to become independent, or do you think that Canada should fight to keep Quebec in the union, sort of like the government in the United States fighting to keep the Southern States from seceding in 1861, during the 1995 referendum, the then Liberal prime minister of Canada, Jean Cretchien, was rumored to have said in meeetings with his cabinet during the referendum that if Quebec votes to become independent from Canada by a narrow margin, then he will not allow Quebec to secede from Canada, and is prepared to send in the Canadian military to enforce his policy, which may mean a civil war breaking out between the Canadian government and Quebec, do you agree with Jean Cretchien's opinion on this matter, or do you think that Quebec should be allowed to go peacefully, even if the difference in the referendum is by a narrow margin.

 

[MoonlessNight]

I wonder what kind possible kind of justification they could cook up for focing to remain part of Canada. It seems in that case they'd just have to admit "we don't want you to leave because we want to continue to profit off of your taxes and other contributions." I mean, what other justification could there be? None of the arguments used in the American Civil War apply here.

 

[RiverSalado]

Maybe it is because it is against the wishes of the majority of the Canadian people, and maybe it is also because there is no provision in Canadian law that allows a province to secede or to leave the union, although I am not familiar with Canadian law I admit, I also doubt if Canada has the capability to win a quick victory against Quebec if it comes to civil war, since the Canadian millitary has been neglected since the 1960's, and the state, as well the the capabillities of its equipement is not that good for a conflict that is more intense or difficult, than routine peacekeeping duties, I also wonder if the members of the Canadian military who are from Quebec will side with Quebec instead of Canada, thus raising the possibility of sabotage and dissent within the ranks of its millitary. It also brings up the possibility that Canada may be Balkanized, or be dismembered into many parts if it allows Quebec to just declare indepedence, since some of its Eskimo population in the Artic is also demanding greater autonomy as well. Plus, Quebec has been granted a lot of autonomy already by Ottawa, despite the fact that it is still a part of Canada, and Jean Cretchien himself is from Quebec.

 

[RiverSalado]

I will appreciate it if some Canadian will comment on this thread, since this thread is about your country after all.

 

[BrownCoat]

Yes, let them go.

 

[RiverSalado]

Article from Wikipedia about Quebec:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec

 

[Moros]

What's the point? They can't sustain themselves. They will have to rely on imports and exports to and from Canada just to be 'independent' that they might as well not secede at all.

 

[Rochir]

Sure, let them secede! And when they come to the Canadian government for financial help ect - let them eat static!!!

If they can sustain themselves - great! If they cannot - too bad!

 

[MoonlessNight]

Sure, let them secede! And when they come to the Canadian government for financial help ect - let them eat static!!!

If they can sustain themselves - great! If they cannot - too bad!

I find that in most cases where a region wants to suceed it is because the government is taking more away from them then they are receiving in return. I can't say whether that is true with Quebec off hand, though.

 

[RiverSalado]

What's the point? They can't sustain themselves. They will have to rely on imports and exports to and from Canada just to be 'independent' that they might as well not secede at all.

Unless Canada declares a trade embargo on it, Quebec will be able to survive and fend for itself, but it may not even come to that since Canada can just send in its military to prevent Quebec from seceding.

 

[RiverSalado]

I find that in most cases where a region wants to suceed it is because the government is taking more away from them then they are receiving in return. I can't say whether that is true with Quebec off hand, though.

Their misgivings come from the fact that the British won over the French in the late 17th and mid 18th century in the battle to control Quebec, thus forcing the French to cede Quebec, along with Acadia and Newfoundland, to the British, thus they reason that the British stole the land from the French, since they will have been a French colony if the British had lost to the French in the French and Indian War in the mid 18th century, thus it means, that if Quebec had remained French instead of British, then it will either be a French colony right now, or it will be an independent country with very close ties to France, instead of being under Canada, since Canada used to be a British colony, and when Canada gained its independence in 1867, Quebec was also part of it, as far as I know, Quebec was not forced to become a part of Canada, but voluntarily joined it.

 

[jlujan69]

Given my country's (USA, not Guam) own civil war, I feel I have no business saying what Canada should or shouldn't do. Americans ought to stay "mum" on this one.

 

[Jipsah]

None of the arguments used in the American Civil War apply here.

I think the main argument during the American War of Secession was "If you try to leave we'll attack you!", which lacks a bit in subtlety.

Let the Queubecois go. If it works, c'est bon. If it doesn't, c'est la vie.

 

[Illuminatus]

Quebec is farther from seceding now than at any point in the last 35 years. Even Lucien Bouchard recently stated that separation would be far less beneficial to Quebec than remaining part of Canada. Support for federalism is hitting highs. It's a pointless question. Unless something major changes, Quebec is not on the track to separation any time soon.

 

[CCGirl]

Why is this in current events?

 

[Billnew]

Security is the most important thing.
For Canada and the U.S.
To have a small country with no military
so close to the bigger countries?
Just like in the U.S., you can't divide a union, and maintain the strength.

I do not believe this is a serious consideration though, I believe some people offer it when they don't like something going on.
The U.S. has these people offering the Cescede.
It won't happen.

 

[zoziw]

At the present time the simple answer is that the current provincial government of Quebec is the federalist liberals and they are not required to call an election until the spring of 2008.

While they are currently low in the polls they have quite a bit of time to turn things around.

If the Parti Quebecois ever did come to power and attempted another referendum it would cause considerable problems because the federal government has passed the Clarity Act which gives them the authority to decide if the question asked is clear and eliminates Quebec's ablility to unilaterally declare itself independent and instead would force them to bargain with Canada and the other provinces on a constitutional amendment that would allow them to leave. (I can hear my fellow Canadians chuckle about the insanity of that).

The problem is that the Parti Quebecois has said they don't recognize the Clarity Act.

Another problem is that since the failure of the Charlottetown Accord no one has any stomach to try to re-open constitutional talks.

Actually, the problem is so much more complicated that for now we will just say that there won't be a referendum until at least 2008-2009.

 

[RiverSalado]

Given my country's (USA, not Guam) own civil war, I feel I have no business saying what Canada should or shouldn't do. Americans ought to stay "mum" on this one.

I think it would be hard for the United States to stay mum if there is a civil war going on north of the 49th parallel, especially if that civil war means that terrorists can slip in from the Canadian border into the United States easier.

 

[RiverSalado]

Thanks for the input Canadians, a headline just got my attention about the Bloc Quebecois coming to power in Quebec and its possible implications that I read in the International Herald Tribune a few days ago.

 

[Jonathan David]

A couple points here....

1. Just for the sake of accuracy, The Bloc Quebecois is a federal party in the sense that it runs candidates in the federal election. The provincial "version" is the Parti Quebecois. So, when we are talking about referenda, premiers, etc, it is the PQ and not the BQ that we are dealing with. If the leader of the BQ is to become the next premier of Quebec, s/he must change parties and win/be acclaimed as the leader of the PQ (as did Lucien Bouchard). My understanding is that Gilles Duceppe has stated that he will not seek the PQ leadership.

2. Zoziw is (as usual) correct in his explanation of the Clarity Act. It is worth noting that this Act is based on a Supreme Court judgement in the Reference Re: Quebec Sucession.

3. The details/motivations of the sovereignist movement are far more complicated than being upset that the French lost the colony to England.

4. I am personally torn on the matter. I think that Canada's refusal to take the sovereignists grievances seriously (I don't mean accomodate... just take seriously) is appalling and completely contrary to the words of fraternity that were spoken in the lead up to the last referendum. I do believe that the french language and culture must be protected. However, I am torn by other questions....particularly protection of aboriginal and minority rights, and a fairly strong tendency towards anti-nationalism. I do not think however that these concerns are without remedy.

J'espere que le Canada va bientot prendre serieusement le Quebec..... sinon, je peux imaginer un jour ou je dirai sans hesitation, "Vive le Quebec. Vive le Quebec libre!"

or, as Les Cowboys Fringants have sung.... "Moi j'verrais un pays qui ferait un compromis entre les mots ecologie, justice et economie parce que bien avant ma patrie et toutes les politicailleries, j'prone les cause humanitaires et j'suis amoureux de la terre..... Une societe plus equitable ou l'developpement serait durable. Et la c'est sur que je cocherais 'oui' pour un pays. Facque d'ici-la j'prends c'qui m'reste de ma fierte de Quebecois et j'te dis Rene 'a la prochaine fois!'..."