Could a soverign Quebec play a role in a Federalist Republic
Knoss @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:03 pm
Of course if a reforendum was regional Duplessis should be divided between areas which were always part of Quebec and areas which were part of Labridor prior to 1966.
maple_leaf1 @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:17 pm
Numure Numure:
maple_leaf1 maple_leaf1:
I think the vote should be regional. I explain: All of the province would vote to decide wether, as a whole, it wishes to seperate from Quebec. Then, if the Quebec generally wishes to seperate but does not obtain at least 90% support, it should go to a secondary vote by regions. I think it would be more fair that way.
Here are the regions: Regions of Québec
Hey, I agree! We should do it now though. A regional vote on seperation. Whats the use of a National vote if we could do a regional one huh?
So, Natives lands won't count. As they are part of the national regions. Only regions we might worry about a lost would be les Outaouais, Eastern Townships and Nunavik.
I like your idea alot more, would make our own country alot easiyer to obtain.
I'm glad to see we finally agree on something.
Numure @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:17 pm
Knoss Knoss:
Of course if a reforendum was regional Duplessis should be divided between areas which were always part of Quebec and areas which were part of Labridor prior to 1966.
Thats not an internal Québec Issue.
Tricks @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 1:50 pm
Numure Numure:
Actually, we have the second highest GDP in this province. Your basing your ''4th'' position income per capita. I did'nt know income was GDP. Did'nt go threw that in High School yet? Only finishing 7th grade now?
If you have such a high GDP, why did you run a deficit? Canada gives more money to quebec then qubec gives to canada. You leave, you lose that money.$1:
WW1 was an imperialistique war of power. A power grab for Austria, that resulted in every single continental european power to get involved. Either way, thats another debate.
What the hell? Grab for austria? Maybe i should let Mustang school you, because you don't know your history. WW1 was allies defending allies. That how it came to be.$1:
The definition of Alliances have changed alot today. But, if you wish to use old ones, Canada's contribution was minuscule in both World Wars. No matter how much importance the CBC puts to Canada's contribution. Allies doesnt mean providing troops and military force, its about providing political and/or economic support to your friends in time of need.
8O Take that back. Many History buffs would kick your ass right now. We basically won ww1 by caping vimy. They had no defense beyond that we walked right to germany. Fool. Wee took the second hardest beach on D day, AND we got closest to the objective. We took a lot of italy our selves. We provided money arms and personnel.$1:
I fail to see how Québec would fail to do this? And I also fail to see how our current good friends in the internationnal community would all of a sudden abandon us.
Im sure quebec could manage to get a military. The question is....could you defend yourself?$1:
You, just showed your own young and foolish ignorance as to what the UN is. Explain to me under what clauses of the UN Québec wouldnt be able to join it. Your just a foolish little child, with but a glimpse of knowledge of how the world works.
I'll give you that one, quebec would probably get a seat. I am not a huge fan of the UN anyways, so doesn't matter one way or another.$1:
Harper is promising a seat on UNESCO, something you cannot have unless your are a country.
We have embassies around the world. Our own seat in the Francophonie. I still fail to see how we would have no allies.
Name one allyWe have embassies around the world. Our own seat in the Francophonie. I still fail to see how we would have no allies.
$1:
Each point is a different basis to use the term Nation. We fall into the first category. A relatively large group of people organised under a single government(L'Assemblé Nationale). Not independant, and thus why they added the ''Usually''.
Your young are just not trained yet to pick up, does small but important nuances.
So your using a techinicality on the definition? Quite amusing. You are not organised, because there are quebequois who don't agree with you and don't do the same shit as you.Your young are just not trained yet to pick up, does small but important nuances.
$1:
Because the world is at war every single day and we are all on the verge of a nuclear war
How did my quote have to do with nuclear war?
Wullu @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:03 pm
Numure Numure:
The definition of Alliances have changed alot today. But, if you wish to use old ones, Canada's contribution was minuscule in both World Wars. No matter how much importance the CBC puts to Canada's contribution. Allies doesnt mean providing troops and military force, its about providing political and/or economic support to your friends in time of need.
4th largest army on earth
4th largest airforce on earth
3rd largest navy on earth
1.1 million men and women under arms from a population of 11 million
An economy that produced more war material in 1944 than Germany ( their best year ever for production of war material )
5 divisions in the field, 2 more at home in Canada
3 army tank brigades in the field ( independant forces not part of an armoured division )
This is miniscule? What is your standard for large?
Tricks @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:56 pm
Saying it is a useless war, that was europes problem. 
Knoss @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:08 pm
$1:
Knoss wrote:
Of course if a reforendum was regional Duplessis should be divided between areas which were always part of Quebec and areas which were part of Labridor prior to 1966.
Thats not an internal Québec Issue.
Of course if a reforendum was regional Duplessis should be divided between areas which were always part of Quebec and areas which were part of Labridor prior to 1966.
Thats not an internal Québec Issue.
No But it could be a federal issue if Quebec were to seperate.
Elvis @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:22 pm
In my Opinion It's more of a democratic issue. Governance is about legitimacy first. If the people decide that the government of Canada is illegitimate to represent it's interest you have a big problem. For exemple if the No camp in 1995 did commit massive voter fraud and polluted the vote in favor of the No by 5%. What would be the legitimacy of the government of Canada in Québec?
Knoss @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:54 pm
Candian States and Sovereignty Act- Draft one
Canada is a Confederation of sovereign states each, a nation with a distinct society, values and traditions. Each state has inalienable rights and duties to their citizens.
1. Each state must be democratic in nature.
A. Each state must have an elected legislative assembly, elected at least every six years.
B. Each state must have an elected governing official; whose term is no more then six years. The title, length of term, and specific responsibilities of the governing official are to be outlined in the states charter.
2. Each state has the right to create criminal law.
A. Member states must recognize the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
B. Shall under no circumstances be permitted the use of capital punishment.
C. Each state is responsible for maintaining prisons to house violators of State laws.
3. Each state has the right to determine in which languages it will conduct business and which it will not.
4. Each state has the right to maintain its own courts.
A. The state government is responsible for the operation of state courts in communities and the appointment of judges.
B. The state court is responsible with passing judgment on state crimes.
C. Each sate must have a supreme court with an elected judge.
D. The Confederation is responsible for ensure at least one federal court is in each state. Decisions of the state Supreme Court may be appealed to a Canadian court of Appeal.
E. A Canadian court can only pass judgment on the legitimacy of a law relative to Confederate law.
5. Each state has the right to maintain a police force to enforce state law
A. State police may only make arrests or apprehensions in their home state.
B. Confederation police must be notified if a fugitive leave the jurisdiction of a state police force.
C. Police may not use assault weapons.
D. States have the right of delegating police service to the RCMP
E. The governing official has the right to request the RCMP and Canadian Forces to assist state police.
6. The state has the right to maintain an armed militia to protect its state interests.
A. Militias have the right to bear assault weapons, but not weapons of mass destruction, chemical or biological weapons, or weapons determined to be excessive for state defense.
B. Militias may have a uniform and standing orders differing from those of the Canadian Forces.
C. A militia may be used to assist state law enforcement at the request of the state government.
D. A militia may become a Canadian forces unit at the request of the Governor General, for training or home defense, pending the approval of the governing official.
E. Outside its home state militias must unsure the use, possession and transport of firearms are in accordance with the Federal Firearms Act, unless given written permission from the unit is given written permission from the Governor General and all those handling said Firearms have signed permission of the Minister of National Defense. The governing official must authorize the movement of a militia outside its home province and notify the Governor General.
F. Upon, declaring an emergency the governing official may request the assistance of the Federal Government and formally request the services of the Canadian Forces, particularly DART.
7. Each state has the right to equal representation in the Senate.
A. Each state shall be represented in the Senate of the Parliament of Canada by two senators.
B. Senators are to be elected
C. The state government may provide funding to state Senators but never to Confederation political parties or candidates when Senate is not in session.
D. States may provide transport aboard to senators, in order to promote state interests.
8. Each state has the right to seek representation in international organizations separate of the Confederation.
9. Each sate recognizes the Confederations responsibilities with regard to;
A. The protection of federal borders is the responsibility of the Confederate government.
B. All out of sate military operations must be performed by the Canadian Forces, the RCMP may assist UN peacekeeping operations.
C. All Canadian states share one currency and recognize the Bank of Canada.
Knoss @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:59 pm
Any thoughts?
Scape @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:09 pm
What, no notwithstanding clause?
Knoss @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:13 pm
What a conservative majority on the horizon?
hamiltonguyo @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:26 pm
Replace the elected governing official with "A Liuetenant Govenor representing the Monarch of Canada or in the case the province wishes to abolish the monarchy elected directly or indirectly by the people by a different method than used to select the Premier."- some provinces still have majority support for the monarch while others (ie Quebec) would wish to get rid of it, this way we leave it to the provinces
Oh and we should keeps provinces and territories instead of renaming them as states. Plus territories should be "in the trust of the Dominion government" until the reach the size and self-survival requirements to become a province(these would need to be set out)
Other than that its good(except for a mecanism for dealing with seperation)
Knoss @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:38 pm
We haven't been a dominion since 1982 and a state is differnt from a province ie. militia. governing official is a general term in La Nation du Quebec it could be Governuer. Int the State of Alberta Governor. In the Dominion of Newfoundland Liuetenant Governor, for the Cree nation Chief. The Confederation's head of state would remain the Governor General.
Provinces are regions in the trust of the Confederate government. The Candian Forces performs all military tasks.
I belive the elimination of Territiories should be a goal of the Candaina government.
hamiltonguyo @ Tue Jan 17, 2006 9:45 pm
I agree that we should gradually remove the territories but they need work before we can give them veto rights and stuff like that.
And Dominion as a term reffering to a system is no longer used it is now Commonwealth realms. This title was inspired by the Dominion of Canada. The title just started being left out more and more as time went on. I think we should bring it back as the first Dominion's ideals(union of sperate colonies compared to union of sovrieng states (similar)) are close to what you want although you are a bit more decentralized. Basically the term represents the form of government you propose better than Federal.