I'm just curious and need some help figuring this all out. If Quebec government is talking about seperation and your military is about to buy some new transport aircraft, should they not be disqualified from contracts for aircraft upkeep since they will be in a seperate country by 2008. This is when the new aircraft are due to arrive? Having them awarded contracts would be considered out of country contracts and if the online news sites from Canada are right you aren't supposed to be doing that.

   

Time to call in all the loans that we gave to Bombardier? I'd doubt they want to stay in the quaint little fifedom of Quebec either. I'd bet we'll see a lot of head offices moving out of there soon.

   

I guess we should wait and see if they actually seperate first.

   

If Quebec separates... Bombardier is out of there... Bombardier's word.

   

Well, I hear from some business friends that they are already considering not doing business there because of the future problems, and most already made Toronto the Canadian head offices because of what happened in 1995 vote. They also feel that Quebec will succeed this time around in sperating. For that reason they are investing in Alberta, Nova Scotia and BC.

But my Question still remains, should Quebec be able to bid on contracts?

   

It actually happened to a lot of head offices since the last decade.
The separatist reason for that is again that "the federal government steals us contract to empoverish ourself and SCARE US!!!!".


The economic side of the question and seeing us becoming more and more without big companies and more more socialists unionized is the main argument I have against sovereignty. At least, we benefic from the rest of Canada who are more realistic about the future.

   

no, they should not be able to bid.
and if we are lucky enough that the welfare state call quebec actually leaves, look at all the money we will get, after all, they would have to pay thier share of the national debt. and that should be calculated based on the percentage of members they have in the house, not based on the population!

   

It seems counter productive to start talking about leaving before you are even in office. I've seen stuff like this backfire before and leave politicians who make promises that negatively impact economic gain cost them an election.

I spoke with my lawyer yesterday at a luncheon for my wife and I and asked him about this contract question. He told me that in the case of Slavacia, in Eastern Europe, after they seperated they found themselves without many of the contracts they had previously signed. In most cases the companies relocated in order to stay in business, or they simply folded up and the assets sold off. He felt that any contract the Canadian government writes now would have a stipulation requiring only Canadian companies, or companies that have a large presence on Canadian soil would be maintained on contract. he said that once the decision to seperate is given, all gloves are off and companies would be at the mercy of the Canadian government. He then asked me, "If you were a trained professional, would you be comfortable with that knowing the people you must count on are very angry about you placing them in the situation in the first place?". I think you are all smart enough to figure out how I answered that.

I do suggest to any seperatist here that they consider not what they would feel from their point of view, rather how the people on the other side of the issue will feel if the vote were to succeed. Be honest with yourself on this because it comes with a huge amount of fallout.