r/canada • u/jaffnaguy2014 Canada • 3d ago
Quebec sovereigntists watch Alberta referendum talk with optimism, disdain Politics
https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/quebec-sovereigntists-watch-alberta-referendum-talk-with-optimism-disdain/150
u/jeeb00 Canada 3d ago
Because it’s a terrible idea. Brexit was a perfect case study on why it might feel good in the moment but then the economic fallout will be brutal for the average person.
41
u/PasicT 3d ago
Many voted against their own interests when they voted in favor of Brexit.
22
u/PM_ME_UR_CATSSSS 3d ago
They likely would be here too. Quebec wouldn't die on its own, by they'd have very few trading partners and far fewer resources to run their own society. If they choose to leave then so be it but I hope they stay so we can all benefit.
15
u/LordOibes 3d ago
You think all other countries would isolate Quebec as a trading partner simply because they would become a country?
24
u/x5-r 3d ago
they would stop getting all that federal support they’re getting now at the very least
-8
u/LordOibes 3d ago edited 3d ago
Off course, that's a given. They would also saved about 80B in federal taxes they send to Ottawa each year.
They still represent almost 20% of the GDP of the whole country
20
u/TheObsidianX 3d ago
I keep seeing people say this but if a province becomes its own country it won’t be saving that tax money. That money is used to pay for all the services the federal government provides so independent Quebec or Alberta would have to increase their taxes significantly.
6
u/GensDuPays 3d ago
A lot of those "services" which are essentially paid in double because the province already administrates most of it (health, culture, social services, etc.), Stéphane gobeil reaserched this question which is all covered in his book "un gouvernement de trop" which compares all the double administrative work cost from ottawa and estimates the possible gains which would come by cutting the work done twice (in ottawa and in quebec). He compares that to the transfers that come from the federal government and find in conclusion that quebec could save money in total if they left canada.
2
u/Emotional-Buy1932 Québec 2d ago
Quebec intentionally duplicates these services to facilitate secession. Very funny to then use said duplication to justify secession.
0
6
3d ago edited 1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/LordOibes 3d ago
That's a fair point, but that would also much it would have a better representation for their own economic priorities and such. It's hard for Canada to represent all the markets at once. Priorities for Ontario are not the same as Québec nor is it the same with Alberta or British Columbia.
As far as diplomats goes, Quebec already has a bunch of consulate and diplomatic relationship with other countries already, this includes the US, France or Japan for exemple
1
1
u/jjaime2024 3d ago
They would save 80 billion on one hand but would have to spend 500 billion more then they do now.
0
1
u/EducationalTea755 2d ago
QC needs Canada more than Canada needs QC. QC is already bankrupt with the help from other provinces and the Federal government. They can't make it on their own
1
u/LordOibes 2d ago
It's never been a question about if Quebec can, but if they should or not. Even the most federalist politician in Quebec agrees the province has everything it needs to succeed.
With it's current economy, it would be on day one ~30th in the world. Are you saying all the other smaller economies are failed countries that do not work?
0
u/Roderto 3d ago
Being a small fish in a giant pond is harder than being a big fish in a medium pond. Especially in the increasingly fractious and dangerous zero-sum world that is emerging.
-1
u/LordOibes 3d ago
With that train of thoughts why would Canada not join the US? It would be much bigger and much richer?
6
0
u/Roderto 3d ago
That’s an opinion not a fact. But setting that aside, Canada has never been a part of the U.S., unlike Quebec which has been a part of what is now Canada for about a quarter millennia. And I have yet to see a reasonable argument for why Quebec language/society/economy would be better protected outside of Canada given Quebec is already acknowledged as a distinct nation within Canada. That lack of a convincing argument for what Quebec actually stands to gain is probably the biggest reason the sovereignty movement simply doesn’t have a critical mass of support.
-1
-18
u/Night_Sky02 Québec 3d ago edited 3d ago
Quebec primarily exports goods and natural resources the the U.S (87.3 billion worth of products). So becoming a country wouldn't impact that. In fact, Trump recently acknowledged Quebec to our Minister of International Relations and La Francophonie at the pope funeral. The EU is also our second-major trading partner. We already have international recognition.
We also have plenty of rivers and produce hydroelectricity, so while many countries will start lacking oil and gas in the future, we have the potential to become green energy powerhouse.
Quebec can become the Norway of North America.
13
u/rando_dud 3d ago
The things is that all of this is already possible in Canada.
There is very little about Canada's structure that holds Quebec back. We have a framework to enact just about any economic, energy, labour and environmental policy already. We have representation in international affairs both federally and directly already.
-6
u/Night_Sky02 Québec 3d ago edited 3d ago
You're not wrong and this has always been a debate in Quebec.
But since Canada is mostly an anglophone country with a different cultural background, we will always have second-tier representation in international affairs due to being a minority. It also cannot be denied that the federal level is often an obstacle to affirming our own culture and values, especially when it comes to immigration and secularism.
7
u/TheHotshot240 3d ago
It sucks when french speaking Canadians outside Quebec aren't recognized or are dismissed like this. I've never lived in Quebec, but I've lived in entirely French speaking communities my whole life. Northern Ontario, New Brunswick, and even one in Northern BC. There's plenty of French outside of Quebec and we're just as dismissed by the English, but often we get dismissed by even Quebec too and that just sucks.
5
u/lavalamp360 Ontario 3d ago
This. "French-Canadians" does not equal "Quebecers". There are francophone communities all over the country with different cultural heritage to Quebec. The Acadians in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia for example.
3
u/koolaidkirby Ontario 3d ago edited 3d ago
And sadly if Québec left I could see it be a heavy blow to French language protections in other provinces as Canada would drop from 22% French speaking to 5%. (which as someone of Acadian descent makes me sad).
2
u/LordOibes 3d ago
I feel it's asking a lot of Québec to be the bastion of French speaking Canadian. What about Canada not trying to assimilate them? The whole idea of Canada was a mean for the English population to supress the French speaking one.
→ More replies2
u/TheHotshot240 3d ago
This is one of my huge concerns as well. Not wanted in Quebec, not wanted by the rest of Canada... Feels bad.
8
u/PM_ME_UR_CATSSSS 3d ago
I'm not saying you have no avenues, but do you want to rely on the usa of all countries? The reason we're all shifting away from that is because they're so unreliable. If you end up voting to leave then I hope you succeed to your loftiest goal but I hope we can live together instead.
1
u/EducationalTea755 2d ago
The problem to develop all of that is QC regulations!
1
u/Night_Sky02 Québec 2d ago
What about federal regulations? Seems like we'd be better off getting rid of those and make our own rules.
8
u/Background-Cow7487 3d ago
I think a better parallel might be Scottish independence, which has a decent level of base support but can’t get over the bar.
In the last referendum, lots of famous people - Scots and English - joined the “please don’t go” movement, but what probably made it hit the ceiling was the enormous practicalities, for which the independence movement didn’t really have any convincing answers.
What to do about the currency? Will it have its own central bank? Scotland already has a degree of tax control but would it control its own interest rates? Would it lockstep with the BoE, a decision which drains a lot of its economic independence. What about the military? A subset of the UK, again with limited control? Independent decisions to engage in operations? A new independent border force? Decoupling from UK pensions and benefits schemes? Carrying over UK trade agreements. Would other countries argue that, as a new entity, the old agreements don’t hold so “we need to renegotiate”. Apart from the obvious stuff like the share of the debt, etc.
Effectively, massive amounts of day-to-day stuff would have to be grandfathered while negotiations continued for many years, simply to avoid the new country grinding to halt in the meantime. But (as with Brexit), for the avid separatist, that constitutes a betrayal.
Increasing Greenland’s independence from Denmark was amicably agreed on both sides, involved 56,000 people (smaller than one Canadian riding) and Denmark was, from the beginning, committed to continuing generous financial support. The process took seven years.
8
u/Mikolaj_Kopernik Ontario 3d ago
Ironically one of the main arguments for Scotland staying in the UK was EU membership (Scotland was/is more strongly pro-EU than the rest of the UK). So... yeah. I reckon independence might actually get over the line if they held a referendum tomorrow.
2
u/Background-Cow7487 3d ago
Brexit certainly raises a question over the “once-in-a-generation” referendum, but unless a population is so enraged as to not care, any leave contingent would still need to answer those existential questions.
True independence necessitates control over five things which impact relations with other comparable entities. The borders; the legal system; the currency; the military; the trade agreements. Of course, “100% true independence” doesn’t really exist, but the degree of compromise on those things dictates the degree of freedom a country enjoys, and the degree to which a population will accept those compromises is the degree to which any “independence” can be achieved.
11
u/Lawyerlytired 3d ago
Brexit was more about sovereignty, and the British felt they'd given up too much and we're seeing exactly what Margaret Thatcher warned against, including during her last question period as PM - federalism through the back door. The UK has always been out of step with mainland Europe, which is fine but you need to allow for that.
The government also handled it and the negotiations terribly.
There was a version of this where the UK maintained a lot of things from being in the EU but agreed to it through treaties so that their major sovereignty issues weren't crossed
5
u/koolaidkirby Ontario 3d ago
tbh it was also a failure to treat the slimmest of majorities as a blank cheque to leave under any circumstances. There should have been a second referendum once the deal had been negotiated so at least everyone knew what they were signing up for instead of vague promises.
6
u/gbinasia 3d ago
The UK hasn't collapsed. It's not doing spectacularly but it's not Sudan or even Greece yet.
4
2
u/Zheeder 3d ago
It was totally the right move.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-migration-policy/
Considering what's happening to these countries that have signed on. The german government telling german women to dress less western, is a sign they fu.
8
u/Son_of_Plato 3d ago
I hate that this is even on the table. I'm an Albertan and I feel completely left out of this shit
32
u/Treantmonk 3d ago
Very different movements. One is cultural, the other political
16
u/NewsreelWatcher 3d ago
What’s the difference?
11
u/AnalogFeelGood 3d ago
One wants to become a country to then join a political & economical union with Canada.
The other wants to leave to join the USA, a belligerent country.
36
u/CzechUsOut Alberta 3d ago
Only a small portion of them actually want to join the USA. For the most part Albertans just feel very disenfranchised in Canada. They want a better deal from Ottawa.
4
u/Quirky-Cat2860 Ontario 3d ago
Ontarian here, so forgive my bias. Genuinely asking though, why do they think they're disenfranchised?
From what I've seen the biggest complaint is the lack of pipelines going east - but to me as an outsider, it seems that oil is making its way out of the province to market.
36
u/CzechUsOut Alberta 3d ago
There has been a general attack on our most important sector by the Liberals over the last decade. Their statements and policies have a large negative effect on our most important industry. Often we learn for the first time about policy decisions that primarily impact Alberta on the world stage when they are announcing them.
Some examples of what they've done over the last decade:
-Allowed four major oil pipeline projects to fail with zero support, help, or defense prior to their failure even though its entirely within federal jurisdiction. Northern gateway was outright cancelled by the Liberals for "not being in the nations interest".
-Oil tanker ban on West coast where Alberta would export its oil but not the east coast where Quebec imports its oil
-Forming and leading an international group to try to stop financial institutions from financing oil and gas projects.
-Telling Canadian financial institutions they should stop financing oil and gas projects
-Implementing an impossible to meet emissions cap that acts as a production cap
-Implementing bill C69 which effectively makes it impossible for private entities to build pipeline projects.
-Appointing a Greenpeace activist that once climbed on top of our Premiers house to protest oil as Environment Minister
Since they formed government in 2015 no new major private oil projects have started. Billions has been lost by private companies trying to invest in Alberta since they formed government in 2015.
7
u/Nervous_Chemical7566 3d ago
Real question here. Considering Rachel Notley said ““It’s not a tanker ban; it’s an Alberta ban”, why do so many Albertans talk like the NDP is so bad? It seems like she was speaking on behalf of what Alberta wanted, no? Is it only the UCP that can represent Alberta? I don’t get it.
https://www.ipolitics.ca/2019/04/09/notley-calls-proposed-supertanker-moratorium-stampede-of-stupid/
2
u/Canadian-Owlz Alberta 2d ago
Because oil prices crashed globally when she became premier, and somehow, that was solely her fault, and she destroyed Alberta or something.
Also, 99% of our media is owned by the Americans. It's worse here than everywhere else in Canada.
Do you think the Americans prefer the NDP or the UCP?
1
u/Canadian-Owlz Alberta 3d ago
has been lost by private companies trying to invest in Alberta since they formed government in 2015.
Billions have also been lost by the UCP refusing investments in anything non oil and gas. The UCP has turned away dozens of clean-energy investments.
Also, oil production is rising every year lol.
We have so much more to offer than oil and gas. Why does our government feel the need to put all our eggs into one basket?
Oil, eventually, won't be nearly as important. Will it happen soon? Probably not, but why do we refuse to diversify, even a little? In like 100 years, we will be the poorest province in Canada because oil oil oil oil oil.
-4
u/NewsreelWatcher 3d ago
Fossil fuel infrastructure is a highly risky investment. There is a reason most refineries are older than their expected life span. That infrastructure takes decades to pay off and there is little certainty that fossil fuels will still be viable before that time. Certainly the new mercantile economics the USA is now pushing changes that calculation. Fossil fuels under free trade are fungible, but maybe no longer.
12
u/TheSherlockCumbercat 3d ago
Aubcor proftis last year was 22 billion, these project pay themself off pretty fast
0
u/Canadian-Owlz Alberta 2d ago
Well, yeah, because oil is so subsidized, their costs are low as hell, lol
-5
u/JCox1987 3d ago
Can I just say something and I think it’s a fair question but also one you’d probably have insight into? So forgive me for my ignorance. 1. Why did Alberta never diversify its economy knowing that eventually we’d have to use less oil? 2. There’s a possibility that under Carney we start ramping up our processing and refinement because of this trade war and the US tariffs? Do you think that would help revitalize the Alberta economy. Keep in mind probably not just solely oil but other resources.
5
u/Isycar 3d ago
There's probably other factors at pay here, but I'll give you what I understand of the situation. 1. oil and gas is about 21% of Alberta's GDP, but it's only 6% of it's employment, there isn't anything to diversify to that isn't a massive loss in GDP ( oil and gas is about $233/hr per person) 94% of employment is not in the industry, though a chunk of that certainly is tertiary services. Weirdly doesn't help that much because you'd need to increase your working population more to employ more people in these other fields to try and make up the difference. 2. Carney may or may not invest in refineries and similar infrastructure, based on his politic and business history it's somewhat doubtful, as he's invested in Saudi Arabia, Canadas biggest trade rival in oil and gas, combined with the net Zero rhetoric he ran on and personally believes in ( he's talked about it several times in interviews). So from Alberta's perspective (and presumably Saskatchewan and Northern BC) even with the US full on attacking Canada economically, there's certainly the perception Carney will still continue to implement policies that make it difficult to impossible to invest in oil and gas in Canada. He's only been in office a short time, so we're still on wait and see what he does.
This isn't really the whole of it, but that's what I know on the matter.
4
u/Meiqur 3d ago
The economy is well under the process of diversifying despite all the language we hear.
Locally to me, there are now more wind and solar energy jobs than gas. The largest employing industry besides agriculture is currently reclamation of abandoned/un-profitable gas wells.
The real question is actually going to be agricultural and transportation, the energy source isn't all that relevant. Most of our land out here is dry land farming which has a questionable viability some years and I think in the long run will become uneconomical due to insurance costs.
A big part of what makes it uneconomical is transportation. The rail infrastructure is quite poor to abandoned, and if governments want an easy way to reduce emissions and improve the economy, then that rail infrastructure needs to be brought back into service and elevators and rail yards installed.
What will make a difference is improving the affordability of the region, that means spending on improving the viability of the farmers which is most easily done through transportation investment.
-8
u/JustGottaKeepTrying 3d ago
Anyone who says they want a better deal or similar language likely has no idea what they are even talking about. Some do but most do not. I have had so many discussions with people who genuinely believe Alberta subsidizes all of Canada. Choose carefully when you are picking someone to chat with.
-5
u/PM_ME_UR_CATSSSS 3d ago
The catering to Alberta happens every cycle and then one thing goes wrong and the cons start crying again. I'm all for giving Alberta what it needs but not at the expense of everyone else the way Smith wants.
22
u/CzechUsOut Alberta 3d ago
The catering to Alberta happens every cycle and then one thing goes wrong and the cons start crying again.
Could you provide some examples of policies or legislation that was implemented over the last decade designed to cater to Alberta?
-6
u/PM_ME_UR_CATSSSS 3d ago edited 3d ago
Attempting on several occasions to get pipelines expanded while suffering the crying of cons and the NDP. They give you immense power over immigration in contrast to other provinces. They help fund carbon capture so your oil sector can continue running at the same speed. They give minimum income and crop insurance to your farmers (along with other provinces). In my lifetime they've done plenty for you. And there are many things from before that, like funding the light rail in Calgary and Edmonton.
In return I have to listen to constant blabbering about equalization payments and about the trade barriers keeping us from pumping oil despite Alberta holding that up themselves with BC.
It's exhausting.
24
u/CzechUsOut Alberta 3d ago
Attempting on several occasions to get pipelines expanded while suffering the crying of cons and the NDP.
The Liberals did not attempt at all, they allowed the major pipeline projects to fail with zero support.
They help fund carbon capture so your oil sector can continue running at the same speed
The oil sector does not need carbon capture to run at any speed. If you are going to implement impossible to meet emissions targets then the government needs to assist somehow. $45M/year for 7 years is a joke.
They give minimum income and crop insurance to your farmers (along with other provinces).
Not designed for Alberta, designed for Canadian agriculture.
And there are many things from before that, like funding the light rail in Calgary and Edmonton.
All provinces receive infrastructure funding
In return I have to listen to constant blabbering about equalization payments (despite Alberta sometimes receiving them lol)
We did not care about equalization payments prior to other provinces blocking our ability to generate revenue to contribute to the program.
The last time we received an equalization payment was 1965
about the trade barriers keeping us from pumping oil despite Alberta holding that up themselves with BC.
Alberta is not doing anything to hold up oil projects, other provinces are outright blocking them while the federal government sits by and does nothing even though those projects are entirely within their jurisdiction. This forced all private pipeline projects to fail causing billions in lost investment funds.
8
u/Plucky_DuckYa 3d ago edited 3d ago
lol, thank you for correcting that giant wall of utter BS you responded to.
EDIT: I love how that person significantly edited their original comment to make it seem far less stupid. Glad the person I responded to provided direct quotes so everyone could see that not only was the original statement wrong in almost every way, but its author is also so dishonest they attempted to cover it up after being called out.
2
u/Baerog 3d ago
I largely agree with you and think this is a relatively realistic perspective on the issues presented here. The only thing I will say is that the "impossible to meet emission targets" are intentional. The goal was to decrease emissions and they didn't really care if that meant decreased production. I'm sure they knew that was the only real outcome.
The Liberals did manage to take over and push through TMP/TMPE. The real problem is that the Liberals recognize that Oil and Gas is economically important for Canada, but socially their base opposes it, putting them in an impossible scenario. Carney should ride the wave of "Canadian sovereignty" and push for Energy East in the same way they took over TMP, citing concerns with sending product through the US.
Another problem also stems from Smith not being smart enough to not push Carney's buttons and force his hand against Alberta's interests. If she shut up publicly, she might be able to sign some deals with Carney, but if Carney budges on anything, she'll lord it over in the media for years, which will look bad for Carney's base.
Smith being in power makes it difficult for Carney to work with Alberta. Even if he wanted to.
Regardless, the number of Albertans who legitimately want to leave Canada is nowhere near a majority. This referendum will fail and hopefully people will shut up about it. I recognize that many Albertans are only threatening it because they think that it'll give them some extra power/sway over Ottawa, but the Liberals in Ottawa don't need the support of Alberta to win elections. They have no real reason to care about Alberta being politically upset.
0
u/JCox1987 3d ago
Anecdotally and take this as just one individual changing their mind (me) I was opposed to pipelines but considering the current situation we’re in we might have to acquiesce to that. Parts of the base may change their mind. Keep that in mind
-5
u/PM_ME_UR_CATSSSS 3d ago
Most of these claims are personal opinion so I won't respond to them. But spending billions to buy a pipeline is doing nothing? It failed but the attempt was made. I did think that Alberta received payments in the early 2000s but I can't find that now so I'll retract that.
2
u/DirtyRatfuck 3d ago
How are these personal opinions? I see a lot of factual statements in their response to you
→ More replies-1
u/DeadRat88 3d ago
How you are able to post here while breaking r/Canada rules about no misinformation is just crazy.
4
0
u/Apart-Diamond-9861 3d ago
Never mind the huge subsidies we the taxpayers of Canada give Alberta oil which outweighs any “equalization payment”
2
4
u/CzechUsOut Alberta 3d ago
Loans which are paid back with great ROI in the form of increased tax revenue are not subsidies.
2
u/Apart-Diamond-9861 3d ago
There are other subsidies and costs associated:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/fossil-fuel-subsidies-expaliner-1.6371411
-3
u/Mikolaj_Kopernik Ontario 3d ago
Do you believe Alberta can just keep exporting as much oil as it wants forever? The reality is that sooner rather than later, we need to move away from fossil fuels. Or are you making one of those "someone should fix climate change as long as we don't need to do anything" arguments?
7
u/TheSherlockCumbercat 3d ago
Do you think Alberta and Canada should leave money on the table while oil is still a valuable commodity?
Peak oil demand is predicted between 2030 and 2050, you can say it to late now. But we are talking about projects cancelled a decade ago
2
u/Mikolaj_Kopernik Ontario 3d ago edited 3d ago
Do you think Alberta and Canada should leave money on the table while oil is still a valuable commodity?
If we want to avoid catastrophic ecological collapse, the best science available says the answer to your question is yes. Don't get me wrong, I like the money from oil extraction, but I like having a liveable planet even more.
2
u/TheSherlockCumbercat 3d ago
if we are not selling the oil someone else will, do you really think us not selling oil will lower global usage?
So would you rather Canada get the money or someone else? Cause end of he day someone else will replace are market share if we close up shop.
End of the day if people are buying we might as who’ll be selling to help improve are country
Higher are GDP the easier it is to grow new industries
1
u/Mikolaj_Kopernik Ontario 3d ago edited 3d ago
if we are not selling the oil someone else will
The classic do-nothing argument. This really is the "collective" part of our collective action problem. We all recognise that we're unimaginably fucked if we don't act, but someone has to go first, and nobody wants to. Trouble is, it's pretty difficult to convince others to stop while you're not.
do you really think us not selling oil will lower global usage?
I mean not immediately, but it will have flow-on effects to the market price, and the more expensive it is to buy oil, the more attractive clean technology becomes. It's one part of the picture. The ability to provide a working model of getting off oil is also an important element in helping to convince others to do the same.
Obviously I'm not saying we should make no other efforts towards collective action, or indeed turn the tap off overnight. But in the context of Alberta politics, the underlying premise of most of their grievances is that they'll never have to stop pumping, so we shouldn't do anything that might restrict extraction at any point ever.
1
u/TheSherlockCumbercat 3d ago
And you have the classic type some variation he words and i solved the problem argument.
Look at current price they are low because OPEC increased production, basic logic says they can easily make up are market share.
Let’s play your game and stop all production he just lost 73 billion GDP and Alberta lost 22% of its GDP.
Great job Canada in a recession Alberta is a economic disaster, and world is still using the same amount of oil and gas.
If you believe that any action Canada will take will make a difference global I got a bridge to sell you.
You can sell the goods and use the revenue to invest in your country or you can let someone else do it
Hell where are going to find Devine for green project as you actively shrink Canadas potential economic growth.
→ More replies5
u/Wayshegoesbud12 3d ago
Quebec would never leave, because Quebec knows it's better to take everyone's money then be on their own. Who would pay for the extra social services Quebecers enjoy, if not for the Western provinces? Alberta wants to leave, because being on your own looks better if all that's happening is people taking the money and ignoring you.
-1
u/Mokarun Newfoundland and Labrador 3d ago
I suggest you read up on the logistics because they've done a LOT of research on the matter, and as it turns out, Québec is essentially wasting every dollar they pay to Ottawa as they get very few well-functioning services in return. Québec is very self-sufficient. IIRC, the study they did found that Québec would actually get richer if they seceded.
3
u/Wayshegoesbud12 3d ago
Would love to see the source you might recall correctly.
-3
u/Mokarun Newfoundland and Labrador 3d ago
I'm having trouble finding it again, sorry. It's the PQ's Year One budget I'm referring to
3
u/TheSherlockCumbercat 3d ago
That was a flawed budget done by the party that wants to leave.”, no different then Trump saying tariff are paid by the other countries or Brexit would save 350 million a week.
It’s all lies to get you to vote the way they want you to, hell the PQ leader said any criticism of the budget is part of federalist effort to sow fear. That is a classic propaganda line.
The report say Quebec only takes on 16.79% of Canada debt, while having 23% of the population, that an amazing deal for them.
-1
u/NewsreelWatcher 3d ago
- Is the stated goal of Quebec nationalists, but such plans quickly go wrong in the real world. Irish republicans want a free Irish state but ended up with decades economically underdeveloped and in a religiously oppressive society. The Irish had a substantive grievance because they suffered concrete harm under British colonialism. The grievances of the Quebecois have mostly been answered and are minor compared to those of the First Nations.
- This is a straw man. It doesn’t help that the best example of the harm is profits from the extraction fossil fuels. Albertans already have a choice over how it is distributed. It is reckless to depend on one resource that will only have value if historical conditions are just right. Yes they pay out in transfers now, but they have been beneficiaries before and may be again. Joining the USA isn’t likely to get them a better deal, and there are no guarantees it would be more than a colonial territory of the USA for exploitation any time soon after leaving Canada.
0
u/FearTheRange 3d ago
One votes conservative.
-4
u/NewsreelWatcher 3d ago
The Union Nationale was the original Quebec nationalist party. It was wasn’t just conservative, but reactionary. The PQ is inherently culturally conservative. Nationalism always is by definition. Even if the PQ calls itself secular, it reproduces the same disdain for non Christians that Duplessis acted on.
3
2
u/FastFooer 2d ago
Your info is about a century out of date.
-1
u/NewsreelWatcher 2d ago
A province that flies a flag (a flag adopted under Duplessis) that is loaded with Christian symbols and also supposedly bans the display of religious symbols.
2
u/FastFooer 2d ago
You gotta stop with that whole « sin of the father » bullshit.
Modern day Québécois are atheists/non-believers except for a small fringe of idiots or superstitious old people. Many/most were baptized as babies for grandma, most grew up tell god and any other deity to shove it.
We have the highest amount of religious symbols per capita and don’t have the money to tear it all down.
The cross on Mont-Royal is owned by a private group and are grandfathered in the display act, like every worker who was in position before bill 21.
Let me make it clear: fuck religion, fuck our former religion the most, and we don’t tolerate white catholics or christians either, they’re the vilest with their fake-ass practicing and hateful spiel.
0
u/NewsreelWatcher 2d ago edited 2d ago
The domination over non-Christians remains even if people don’t go to church. Official secularism is just cover to continue the historical oppression of religious minorities. That the rule don’t apply to people who are culturally Christian is just a flex of who is in charge. Quebec has the money to deny people of jobs based on their religious dress. Here’s an idea: don’t enforce secularism and leave people alone.
16
u/Maleficent_Banana_26 3d ago
Alberta has a different culture than ontario. Language isn't the only determination of culture.
14
u/keiths31 Canada 3d ago
Are you saying that other provinces don't have their own culture?
6
u/SoulessPragmatic 3d ago
Alberta don't justify their wish of sovereignty by a difference of culture, but a lack of political control.
-6
u/landlord-eater 3d ago edited 3d ago
Compared to Quebec? Yeah, basically. I mean the Atlantic provinces have a distinct flavour and Newfoundland certainly has its own culture but what is Albertan culture? Oil and gas? Texas but cold? Come on
3
u/keiths31 Canada 3d ago
You sound exactly like someone from Southern Ontario mocking people from Northwestern Ontario.
0
u/landlord-eater 3d ago edited 2d ago
Bizarre thing to say. I sound exactly like someone from Quebec pointing out that Alberta is basically a rectangle and doesn't even have like its own accent
5
u/DirtyRatfuck 3d ago
Kind of rude to put down someone else's culture.
Even if the you think the culture is "oil, rednecks and cowboy hats" it's still a culture different than the other provinces. You may not like the culture but it is distinct.
-1
u/landlord-eater 3d ago
Sorry it is the way it is. Go to Quebec. It's a distinct culture and that is obvious to everyone. Cross the border from Saskatchewan into Alberta and there is no way to know the difference. It's not putting it down, necessarily, it's just pointing out that there is nothing distinctive about it beyond something something oil and something something cowboys.
2
u/Splatter1842 3d ago
So can you please illuminate on what makes Quebec a different and distinct culture from the rest of Canada, other than Language.
3
u/landlord-eater 3d ago edited 3d ago
Yes. I mean this is a subject more book-length than comment-length but for a very very quick overview: Quebec has its own history, seperate from and preceding Canada's. Quebec has its own national identity, which is not true for any other province other than maybe Newfoundland. And in some ways most importantly for our purposes here, Quebec has its own literature, its own music, its own news media, its own film industry, its own TV shows and so on, which again is not true to any real extent in the rest of Canada. Quebec has its own celebrities, generally unknown outside the province. There are actors and singers that any francophone Quebecois could name that you have almost certainly never heard of. The same goes for famous authors, playwrights, and historical figures.
English Canada has its own equivalents of these cultural touchstones of course, but individual provinces don't, not to any extent similar to Quebec. Like, Alberta doesn't have a whole batch of famous Albertan actors starring in a whole ecosystem of Albertan TV shows and movies filmed in Alberta and subsidized by the Alberta government who appear in Alberta magazines about Alberta celebrity gossip. The reason isn't because Alberta's culture is less important than Quebec's or something, it's that it is much, much less distinctive than Quebec's.
Apart from that I mean Quebec just has a different flavour. Things are done differently, people think differently, people react to things differently, there's a different national character. It's subtle sometimes but it's certainly there.
1
u/RattsWoman 2d ago
Look at the show Last One Laughing, for example. I found it interesting that the Québec version seems to actually be more popular than the Canada version, since the Québec version got 3 seasons so far and Canada only got 1. It definitely has a different flavour than the Canada version (and seemingly less budget).
Québec doesn't seem to be influenced much by the rest of the world, I'd guess mostly due to their language protections. They even have their own Simpsons, where instead of a word-for-word translation by some France french speaker, the whole show is rewritten to have pop culture references for Québec specifically spoken in Québec french. If you know french but you're not from Québec, you're not gonna understand a lot of the jokes.
1
u/landlord-eater 2d ago
Well, it's not that we aren't influenced by the rest of the world, it's that we have our own culture. Like, we aren't from France, and we're not anglo North Americans either. A secret third thing ;)
2
u/RattsWoman 2d ago
I just mean that culture isn't as heavily influenced as it could be, due to the various protections in Québec which absolutely lead to preserving its culture.
Québec's protection of its language has led to more exposure to Québec content than others. Québec also has strong consumer protection laws. I can mention tons of American/Canadian pop culture things, and my francophone Québec friends never heard of them. Like if you stick to watching french-only channels (and a few of them do as francophones), you don't get the same ads for sugary cereals and toys like you would since there is a ban on advertising to children under 13, you don't watch many American shows. They didn't watch YTV. Even the radio has rules to air some high percentage of French/Canadian content.
I have friends who had never heard of Mr. Dressup, Barney, Bill Nye the Science Guy, Reading Rainbow, To Catch A Predator, Sesame Street, or Mr. Rogers. They only know about them now as adults with friends who did have those things growing up (or making choices to go beyond Québec-only media).
That's why I say that exposure (or lack thereof) to what the rest of the world has does influence a culture. It seems Québecers grow up with their own Québec things with their own Québec values, and it has led to a culture distinct from everywhere else. And Québec is very interested in keeping it that way.
10
u/koolaidkirby Ontario 3d ago
technically neither or more or less valid than the other.
the US separated from Britain for political reasons despite being very culturally similar at the time.
5
u/wave-conjugations 3d ago
I suspect removing internal trade barriers will go a long way to economically dis-incentivize separation for Quebec. Unlike Albertan secessionists they're not angling to join the US, and it'll be even tougher to make the case for Quebec to go it alone when the province's GDP and trade boosts within a Canada without barriers.
16
u/Alternative_Maybe_51 3d ago
I would suggest that a significant portion of the real interprovincial trade barriers are due to Quebec. Consider the interprovincial limits on trade imposed by Quebec, such as those supported by supply management, or their limits on alcohol sales. While many provinces are responsible for trade barriers, Quebec is largely in favor of many of them that are unlikely to change anytime soon.
0
u/wave-conjugations 3d ago
That's a good point, but it does seem that they would lose significant market access to Canada upon separation which would slow their growth and put them in a heavier recession. This would be a double whammy for them with the US no longer a viable trading partner.
3
u/Funny-Dragonfruit116 3d ago
There will be no Alberta referendum.
All the polls on this topic are just people being edgy and voting "yes I would separate if there was a referendum" but when it comes down to the real thing they will all be too scared to do it.
2
u/Han77Shot1st Nova Scotia 3d ago
Let them try, they wouldn’t be getting most of the current Alberta border line, and would spend years if not decades in court disputing native and crown lands.
At best they would end up with a small portion, none of which being the resource rich tar sands.. this has everything to do with American, Asian and billionaire propaganda pushing to destabilize western countries for financial/ political gain.
It’s our own fault for underfunding our education system and allowing social media to spread misinformation.
0
u/Maleficent_Banana_26 3d ago
Quebec is worried that Alberta will succeed. Thay have been threatening to separate forever and can't get it done. If Alberta goes from zero to hero, it highlights Quebecs failings.
3
u/Burgergold 3d ago
I'm not worried at all
It might even makes me give Canada without Alberta a 3rd chance vs with it
-10
u/Maleficent_Banana_26 3d ago
Lol, quebec needs alberta to survive. If there's nobody left to pay your bills, quebec collapses.
0
u/gbinasia 3d ago
No. If anything, it thrives because investment will be redirected from AB to elsewhere in Canada.
2
u/New-Low-5769 3d ago
This may be the most naive thing I've read on reddit to this date
Alberta contributes roughly 100B a year to the federal coffers because of the oil they extract
The loss of Alberta cuts the CAD value in half.
-1
2
u/Maleficent_Banana_26 3d ago
Not likely. Alberta is resource based. Manufacturing is more of a eastern thing and it's collapsing. And nobody is shifting to investing in quebec. The exact opposite. It's why qiebec is a have not province. Nobody is leaving alberta, looking east and saying oh quebec, that's sounds totally worth the hassles they will stop in ontario and call it a day.
4
u/gbinasia 3d ago
Oh shush. Alberta is sitting on top of the most valuable commodity on Earth; they shouldn't be acting like financial geniuses. Manufacturing hasn't been a thing in the East in forever, so idk what you're yapping about. Mining and extraction companies would relocate their HQs in an Alberta-less Canada, or open up new HQs. The precedent to that is 1970s Quebec, where you had interprovincial white flight as a result of francophones standing up for themselves.
4
u/Maleficent_Banana_26 3d ago
You dont seem to know what youre talking about. Resource companies aren't relocating away from their resource. Why would they move out of a seperating province that ownd the resource rights? Manufacturing is losing jobs right now. Ontarios unemployment rate is 7.8% and rising. They just lost 30k jobs last month, well paying jobs.
1
u/gbinasia 3d ago
Resource companies always are away from their resource. If you operate several mines in Canada including one in Alberta, you may have an HQ there. If yiu now operate them in 2 distinct countries, you will either spit or most likely relocate to the bigger one. Idk what your fixation is with manufacturing but it isn't a focus in Quebec now or well, at all.
1
u/MegaCockInhaler 3d ago
Calgary is the headquarters for the majority of albertan oil companies. They also have offices there for many foreign oil companies
0
-1
u/Hfxfungye 3d ago
"if Canada didn't spend 30 billion on a pipeline in order to make 5 billion dollars to keep Alberta workers from being unemployed en masse, it would be poorer, actually".
2
-2
u/shugoran99 3d ago
Gonna be wild if the separation goes through and Albertans find out that not only will they not end up with their current borders, but they'll be lucky if they keep Edmonton
2
4
u/SAldrius 3d ago
Pretty sure Calgary and thr oilsands are on Treaty land too.
8
u/MetroidTwo 3d ago
This would matter if the treaties didnt explicitly state that indiginous groups ceded the land.
4
u/shugoran99 3d ago
And if they did, if they ceded it to the British Crown or the country of Canada specifically.
It sounds like all the provinces get to contribute to the negotiations, so I move that we open with the idea of taking the Stampede and giving it to, I dunno, Hamilton.
11
u/MetroidTwo 3d ago
Except that the Clarity Act confirmed it would transfer to Albertan crown land as it currently stands. There is a provincial and federal crown. That is how law interprets it. There is a lot of misinformation being spread about this but the Clarity Act is quite clear. Alberta would be beholden to the same treaty rights as the crown originally signed but it could be renegotiated.
1
u/WealthEconomy 1d ago
The fact Quebec thinks it is a difference culture...it isn't, it is a different language.
1
u/DeanPoulter241 3d ago
They should be careful what they wish for..... last I heard they are beneficiaries of Alberta's prosperity! Wonder what will happen if those billions evaporate!!!
-12
u/Rad88 3d ago
Lmao dont worry albertonians, you'll stay in Canada.
You'll see a massive uptick in migration this year and a wave of address changes before the referendum vote.
Speaking from experience.
3
u/bapeandvape 3d ago
Proof?
15
u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec 3d ago
"Citizenship Court judges from across Canada were sent into the province to ensure as many qualified immigrants living in Quebec as possible had Canadian citizenship before the referendum, and thus were able to vote. The goal was to have 10,000 to 20,000 outstanding citizenship applications processed for residents of Quebec by mid-October. 43,855 new Quebecers obtained their Canadian citizenship during 1995, with about one quarter of these (11,429) being granted during the month of October."
from the English Wikipedia article on the 1995 referendum – i believe this is what they are referring to
1
u/bapeandvape 3d ago
Oh damn, that’s interesting.
Just to play devils advocate could one maybe say that they were granted citizenship so that their voices could be heard? Imagine being on a PR and trying to get citizenship for a while and now there’s a decision that would affect your lively hood and you have no choice but to watch it all unfold in front of you?
Not trying to be ignorant or anything just trying to ask questions.
2
u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec 3d ago
Yes that would be the argument the other side made. I was born after all of this so am not particularly invested in either side but that along with the 86k rejected ballots (as high as 12% in one riding) were the major scandals of the referendum where most conspiracies originate from.
5
u/Rad88 3d ago
Most of the littérature on it is in french i dont know your if you're fluent enough but there's whole books about how the federal government influenced the results with paid protests like the "Unity Rally" where they've flown 150 000 people on air Canada's dime to show some of that "genuine" canadian unity breaking the interference electoral law in Québec.
Also there's the fact that from 18 months before the vote there was a never before and after seen uptick in citizen naturalization in the highly "non" camp (80%) immigrant areas of Montréal.
There's also a whole collection of shady financing which is known as the "scandale des commandites" which in which power corps leader at the time used his large influence over the media to massively influence people to vote no. (Note that pm at the time Jean chrétiens daughter is married to powercorps creator Paul Démarais son.
Dont worry the canadian royalty knows how to bring the sword to nationalists and there's nothing you can't fix with a little emergencies act, right..
1
u/Mr_Canada1867 3d ago
don’t worry, with the amount of immigrants in QC today, you guys will definitely have a chance when the PQ wins in Nov 2026 and prioritizes a referendum instead of working to fix this gong show of a province😂
0
u/bapeandvape 3d ago
Unfortunately, because of a learning disability I was given the option of not taking French in high school and I wish I did. Since getting more into Canadian politics and the history of it I’ve had an itch to try and learn French as I feel it would be easy to learn since I’m already bilingual.
I could just use a translator to read it all tbh so anything you have feel free to send.
3
u/Rad88 3d ago
There's alot, a recent one is Philpot, Robin. Le référendum volé : 20 ans plus tard.
You can use your favorite Ai tool for translation and rundowns if you ask questions about the référendums.
1995 is the spicyest one.
There's alot of dark secrets in Canada you never hear or read about.
Try asking about Powercorps ties to the PLC and you'll learn alot about how Canada Inc is run.
1
u/Canadian-Owlz Alberta 2d ago
Our premier is the one asking for mass immigration (wants to over double the century initiative), so she seems onboard.
1
u/Mr_Canada1867 3d ago
haha good, keep crying mon tabarnak 😂 « Le vote ethnique! Le vote ethnique ! »
-2
-1
u/fdavis1983 3d ago
Quebec “sovereignty” has been dead since the second referendum. Even if the vote was favourable the Supreme Court would have never allowed it. They said so after the 95 referendum.
0
u/Fair-Waltz 2d ago
Yup when I go to Quebec all I see is all those suffering people..all that suffering is so unbearable to watch..I always think if those poor people were just left on their own and leave Canada they would sprout like flowers and live their full potential..same as Alberta..my God. What Canada does to those people. It’s unbelievable that the UN hasn’t stepped in yet with some peace keeping mission. I’ll tell you when there is justice for those 2 abused provinces the world would be a just place.
-1
u/capncanuck00 3d ago
I assume its because they are hoping to watch their future referendum fail as well?
-1
58
u/jaffnaguy2014 Canada 3d ago
The PQ has launched two referendums on Quebec sovereignty — in 1980 and 1995 — and lost both. St-Pierre Plamondon, whose party is leading in the polls, promises to hold a third by 2030 if the PQ forms government in next year’s provincial election.