Not so fast Mr. Martin...

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So Free trade is the best you can do?

Maybe your manufacturers did not do so well, but what about the rest of the province?

You're the one who is claiming that the free trade agreement benefited the east while screwing the west. That of course is ridiculous.

As for the rest of the province, the trade agreement created turmoil.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I think it's a stretch to lay the blame for the destruction of the PC solely on the West.

No, it's history. The Reform Party was formed to as a direct challenge to the PC Party. The reformers then spent 20 years undermining and eventually destroying the PC party. Had it not been for the Reform party, the PC party would have been able to challenge the Libs.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
And you missed my question on Stephen Harper. Why do people outside of the west have doubts on him as PM?
What's the beef here?

People throughout the country have doubts about Harper.

How about the fact that he insulted Maritimers by saying they had a welfare culture.

Then there are the crazy policies of the Reformers/Alliance.

Then there is the simple fact that people like Harper love to cry about the nasty Eastern bastards are screwing the west which is total crap.

People have about as much patience for this type of whining as they do for the PQ whining about how Quebec is getting screwed.

Canadians want a leader who will fight for the country, not someone who will only fight for one region.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Not the majority. Defeated strongly out west.

A majority of westerners thought that "distinct society" meant "better society". They thought it gave special benefits to Quebec when it only recognised the fact that Quebec is different from English Canada. That's the main reasons they voted against it.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
That would have to go under all Canadian politics threads.

OB:

The real question is in Ontario, and in the Maritimes. Will conservative support hold up in the maritimes? Can they close the gap in Ontario? Right now, I think they can reasonably expect to get 14-16 seats in Ontario, and with each percentage point increase, they will get more.

In fact, from a federal election perspective, you're right.

But there's something you guys don't seem to understand: Quebec considers itself a nation (60-70% of Quebecois say they aren't Canadians, but Quebecois first).

The situation here is a huge mess: 55-60% of the francophones are separatist (61% in 1995 referendum), and they feel like the English/immigrants minority is depriving them of their right to form a country. I won't be debating on this delicate issue (unless you guys insist ).

It still remains that 45% of Quebec is separatist, and that the province has NOT recognized the Constitution of the Federation. That's right, no Quebec government (liberal or PQ) will adhere to the Constitution.

We can't act forever like this situation doesn't exist. There are three issues left:

1. A new deal a la Meech. VERY unlikely, esp. given the unwillingness of the West on the matter.

2. The Conservatives win, and the federal gradually withdraws from provincial issues. The situation in Quebec stays the same. Separatism slowly dies, as the French Canadians get assimilated (on the very long run). Note that for this to happen, we probably need two solid Tory mandates.

3. A recession, a scandal, or anything really bad. PQ gets in office and wins a referendum. Now, things are getting... interesting.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


NDP and Bloc.

Liberals are only decriminalizing.

to them

[notyoueither]

I think it's cute to watch Reformers and New Democrats debate the history of the Progressive Conservatives. But that is the past. The future is now. I see several issues that will be 'interesting'.

If Canadians really want an end to things like the Sponsorship scandal, Parliament will need some reforming, as will the civil service to an extent. How is it possible that $100 out of $250 million earmarked was stolen, in effect, and no one outside of a single cabinet minister was in the know? How could several heads of Crown Corporations be ensnared as well, and still no MPs caught wind of it? How could 15 mostly senior (I think) civil servants ignore the theft and do things that warrant dismissal, but still no MPs knew about it? Something is seriously FUBAR in Ottawa, and it ain't just the Liberals of Jean Chretien. What's goning to happen about that?

Do Canadians want reform in Ottawa? Would Canadians trust governmental n00bs to do it? Could a party that has been out of power for 10 years do it without MPs who know where the levers of power really are?

Will Martin really stick to the topic of reform, and will he be able to sell it sufficiently to avoid the destruction of his government and his party? This assumes of course that the enquiry and criminal investigations clear him and other members of cabinet who were there then and now. The destruction of the Liberals is unlikely I think, as Martin is no doubt a more willy politician and campaigner that Kim was, but that evening in 1993 shocked just about everyone. However, if the enquiry is seen as tainted... na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye!

Governments, governments, governments... Who forms the next one? I don't see the Conservatives ever being able to do it except by themselves, or in an extreme case with the NDs. It would have to be pretty extreme and clear that the Liberals had to go at all costs. No slight to Quebec intended, but how could any party that wants to build in the rest of Canada accept support from the BQ? They're seperatists!

However, in the evil thought category, who else could sell an amendment to the Constitution other than the accepted reps of the West and of the Quebecois, so long as the concerns of Ontario are taken into account? Unfortunately, this thought should be filed under flight of fancy, most likely.

That leaves us with the Liberals and NDs. Actually, for reform, I would not be too unhappy with Martin back-stopped by the NDs. I'm not sure about other issues, but as far as I am concerned there is only one priority at the moment. Something must be done about the pits of corruption also known as Ottawa. I don't think the Conservatives have the experience to do it, not to mention the bed-rock of support for the Liberals in the media that would not leave them alone to do it. Some parties are simply not able to deliver even if they ernestly desire to do so. Reform of Parliament and the civil service would be welcomed in Western Canada, no matter who did it, and if it were the Liberals doing it Ontario and their traditional allies in the chattering classes would be hard pressed to complain.

End of ramble, but that was just the first issue.

[Ben Kenobi]

You're the one who is claiming that the free trade agreement benefited the east while screwing the west.

No. I want to increase the Free Trade deal. That would benefit the West, and the East, and all of Canadians.

The Reform Party was formed to as a direct challenge to the PC Party.

But not 20 years ago.

the PC party would have been able to challenge the Libs.

No, if it were not for this recent merger, the Conservative party of Canada would fade into the dustbin of history, along with Joe who. So the Alliance have actually saved Conservative Canadians, rather than destroying the party.

The PCs were bankrupt after 1992, and would not have been able to recover against the Liberals.

How about the fact that he insulted Maritimers by saying they had a welfare culture.

That's not what he said, and you know it. People are leaving Newfoundland, and Harper wants them to have jobs available so that they stay. Rather than being anti-Maritime, Harper wants to address some of the problems rather than turning a blind eye to them.

A majority of westerners thought that "distinct society" meant "better society". They thought it gave special benefits to Quebec when it only recognised the fact that Quebec is different from English Canada.

Yep. That is precisely, how Distinct Society would have worked, to further solidify the position of central canada, to the loss of the West. It does mean special benefits for Quebec, regardless how you spin the question. Recognition implies benefits.

Then there are the crazy policies of the Reformers/Alliance.

Do tell! What policies are crazy? Is it their commitment to fiscal responsibility? To a triple E senate?

Canadians want a leader who will fight for the country, not someone who will only fight for one region.

Fair enough. Now please show me how Harper's policies only benefit the West.

[Ben Kenobi]

and for that last point.

How does the Mangler match up to providing benefits for all of Canada, not just Quebec? He did very well for his home riding of Shawinigan.

[Ben Kenobi]

3. A recession, a scandal, or anything really bad. PQ gets in office and wins a referendum. Now, things are getting... interesting.

Yeah, especially with the Tories in power Federally. Do we send in the tanks again?

[Ben Kenobi]

However, in the evil thought category, who else could sell an amendment to the Constitution other than the accepted reps of the West and of the Quebecois, so long as the concerns of Ontario are taken into account? Unfortunately, this thought should be filed under flight of fancy, most likely.

Historically, those have been the coalitions that have worked for the Conservatives, getting the West and Quebec. It happened in 1988, and will probably be needed again.

Look at it this way. With the BQ as minority partners in a Conservative dominated coalition, they will now have to espouse Federalism, or face the collapse of the coalition. They will be able to push through a Constitutional amendment to bring Quebec in, as the support of Ontario and the Maritimes is already there.

It's crazy enough to actually work!

[notyoueither]

I have a question for those from Quebec. What are the chances of the Conservatives rebuilding in Quebec in the next 5 years? 10? 20?

Canada cannot be governed well and survive easily without the participation of Quebec in government. Is it a choice between Liberals with support in Quebec, or Conservatives who will allienate Quebec by the absence of any Quebec MPs in government?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Historically, those have been the coalitions that have worked for the Conservatives, getting the West and Quebec. It happened in 1988, and will probably be needed again.

Look at it this way. With the BQ as minority partners in a Conservative dominated coalition, they will now have to espouse Federalism, or face the collapse of the coalition. They will be able to push through a Constitutional amendment to bring Quebec in, as the support of Ontario and the Maritimes is already there.

It's crazy enough to actually work!

Yeah, except the last time a Conservative coalition tried, the party of the first Prime Minister of this country was destroyed in the process by sniping from small minds in the West.

This issue alone was not the death of the Tories, but it was the birth of Reform. Reform then capitalised well on other issues with the laughing approval of the chattering classes. Reform won seats and the CBC laughed their asses off... all the way to Chretien's corruption machine.

I wonder if they all think it was worth it?

btw, I am not at all bitter. Not a bit. No, no, no. Not me. Not in the least.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by notyoueither
I have a question for those from Quebec. What are the chances of the Conservatives rebuilding in Quebec in the next 5 years? 10? 20?

Quebec is probably the most progressist/leftist province in Canada. As long as it gets the feeling that the Reform has taken over the tories, you can forget anything about one being elected. In the 80s, Mulroney was seen as the moderate who would temper the West, and that's why he was popular in Quebec.

Canada cannot be governed well and survive easily without the participation of Quebec in government. Is it a choice between Liberals with support in Quebec, or Conservatives who will allienate Quebec by the absence of any Quebec MPs in government?

I don't get your question. OK, I'm tired, but if you manage to explain that clearly soon enough I'll answer before going to bed.

[notyoueither]

That's the question. How long will the people of Quebec support only one federalist party and thus assure either corruption, or alienation?

[notyoueither]

Oops, he didn't answer.

I think it's a good question even though I suspect that most Canadians might not like the answer.

Alberta alienated everyone can laugh off. Quebec on the other hand...

[Tingkai]

Ben, the Reform Party was formed in 1987. That makes it close to 20 years ago and it was formed as a direct challenge to PC Party.

The existence of two right-wing parties split the conservative vote. The years of infighting meant that they didn't on defeating the Liberals.

The PCs were out of gas by 92, but this routinely happens with many parties that form governments. What usually happens is that the party rebuilds itself. But with the Reform-PC battles, it took 12 more years just to unite. They still have to pick a leader and form policies that are attractive to voters.

So the Conservatives won't be a force until after this election.

As for Harper, it doesn't matter what he was trying to say. What matters is what he said.

It just like if a politican wanted to say western Canadians should work to create a strong nation, not just a strong region. That's fine. But it would not be acceptable for a politician to say Westerners should "stop whining".

As for fiscal responsibility, conservatives always talk about that, but nine times out of 10, conservative governments are reckless spenders (Lord, Devine, Mulroney, Vander Zann).

The Triple E idea is crazy. It makes no sense for the 125,000 people in PEI to have the same power as 4 million BCers.

But we all know that the Triple E is designed to benefit the west.

The idea that the elected senate would not have political parties is pure pie-in-the-sky. There is a reason political parties form: organisational power.

The Distinct Society statement in the preamble merely recognised what is fact. Quebec is a distinct society with different laws, a different main language own laws, and a different culture. The accord did not contain any promises that Quebec would receive special benefits. The accord simply its actual differences must be recognised. That would have provided protection against attack, but not special benefits.

The proper analogy is the fact that the constitution provides protection against sexual discrimination. This doesn't mean that women get special benefits. It simply means they cannot be discriminated against.

[notyoueither]

But we all know that the Triple E is designed to benefit the west.

No, the Triple E Senate is to defang to tyranny of whoever may be the sitting PM at the time.

We have little better than a dictator as things stand. That's because there is no real way of foiling a PM who commands loyalty through patronage or fear.

Canada needs better than what we have. The Triple E Senate is one possible solution.