[Redragon]

I was just thinking about something, if pro independence voters will the next referendum and a bill declaring independence is tabled in the Quebec legislator, would the Lieutenant Governor of that province be able to withhold royal assent for the bill to become law? I know that sparks problems within itself and probably push more people into the pro independence side but would it be possible?

[Streaker]

Technically it would be possible for the lieutenant-governor to block the legislation but it's an extremely unlikely scenario. The PQ would be sure to appoint a lieutenant-governor who would be sympathetic to the separatist cause.

[QuebecSpock]

Streaker wrote:

Technically it would be possible for the lieutenant-governor to block the legislation but it's an extremely unlikely scenario. The PQ would be sure to appoint a lieutenant-governor who would be sympathetic to the separatist cause.

Did it already happen since 1867 that the governor general , a lieutenant-governor or the Senate blocked a legislation?

[Tman1]

Streaker wrote:

Technically it would be possible for the lieutenant-governor to block the legislation but it's an extremely unlikely scenario. The PQ would be sure to appoint a lieutenant-governor who would be sympathetic to the separatist cause.

Hmmm im not sure about the Lieutenant-Governor General that can block but maybe the Governor-General could. Im not real too sure since the Queens representative is pretty insignificant in Canadian politics and many people tend to ignore the gov generals in question. Truth be told I don't really hear much about the L-GG much.

[Proculation]

Streaker wrote:

Technically it would be possible for the lieutenant-governor to block the legislation but it's an extremely unlikely scenario. The PQ would be sure to appoint a lieutenant-governor who would be sympathetic to the separatist cause.

The lieutenant governor is appointed by the Prime Minister, not the Premier.

[Bigboy]

Yeah the GG and LG can both Block.. I wish it would have been used more (The Arrow is one example)

[Proculation]

Another interesting point is that since the separation of Quebec would need to amend the constitution and maybe change the way we amend it, it would at least require the consent of 2/3 of the provinces and all the federal houses. If it changes the way Canada amends the constitution, it would need unanimity in all provincial and federal houses.

[MustangJay]

I came acrross this article on the Globe & Mail and thought it was kind of interesting http://www.vigile.net/00-1/ontario-impact.html

It appears Ontario did some investigational work about the pros and cons of Quebec seperating. Summary; although short term effects to the economy would be negative, Ontario would benefit in the long term from a host of companies that would leave Quebec for nearby Ontario, new immigrants entering the provence, and a new balance of political and economic power in Canada. After looking into the subject a little more it would appear that Ontario at one time (and possibly still does) had/has a secret agenda involving Quebec seperation. In fact, a family member of mine once worked in the Bank of Nova Scotia and told me that prior to the 1995 referrendum, Ontario financial institutions successfully convinced several wealthy Quebecors to move large sums of money into Ontario branches out of fears of a finacial block on accounts in the event of a YES vote. In addition, years of Bloc rule in Quebec has led to several large companies leaving Montreal for Toronto. Would it be too crazy to worry that the seperatist threat might just not be from our buddy Gille Ducept but from the Ontario government as well? Hmm...maybe I'm just getting too carried away with conspiracy theories here but the facts seem to add up.

Any thoughts people?

Thanks

[Tman1]

MustangJay wrote:

I came acrross this article on the Globe & Mail and thought it was kind of interesting http://www.vigile.net/00-1/ontario-impact.html

It appears Ontario did some investigational work about the pros and cons of Quebec seperating. Summary; although short term effects to the economy would be negative, Ontario would benefit in the long term from a host of companies that would leave Quebec for nearby Ontario, new immigrants entering the provence, and a new balance of political and economic power in Canada. After looking into the subject a little more it would appear that Ontario at one time (and possibly still does) had/has a secret agenda involving Quebec seperation. In fact, a family member of mine once worked in the Bank of Nova Scotia and told me that prior to the 1995 referrendum, Ontario financial institutions successfully convinced several wealthy Quebecors to move large sums of money into Ontario branches out of fears of a finacial block on accounts in the event of a YES vote. In addition, years of Bloc rule in Quebec has led to several large companies leaving Montreal for Toronto. Would it be too crazy to worry that the seperatist threat might just not be from our buddy Gille Ducept but from the Ontario government as well? Hmm...maybe I'm just getting too carried away with conspiracy theories here but the facts seem to add up.

Any thoughts people?

Thanks

Hmm interesting. Might want to flash this baby onto the Separatist thread. Then again, it would recycle the whole argument. Separatists would argue that it would be in their economic benefit to separate.

[QuebecSpock]

QuebecSpock wrote:

Did it already happen since 1867 that the governor general , a lieutenant-governor or the Senate blocked a legislation?

Someone knows ?

[DerbyX]

Why did the other separatist thread disappear? Is it being preserved for posterity?

[QuebecSpock]

DerbyX wrote:

Why did the other separatist thread disappear? Is it being preserved for posterity?

It is still there, but a strange bug has made it invisible. I reported the bug to Canadaka.

You can still reach the thread by using this link:

http://www.canadaka.net/modules.php?nam ... start=2250

[DerbyX]

Your link brings me there but I can only see the most current page, which was your test post. Maybe the thread has reached its maximum post/word limit?

[QuebecSpock]

DerbyX wrote:

Your link brings me there but I can only see the most current page, which was your test post.

Just click on the "150" at the top of the page.

[polemarch1]

Quote:

Did it already happen since 1867 that the governor general , a lieutenant-governor or the Senate blocked a legislation?

Quote:

King succeeded in getting a majority vote based on the speech from the throne, the government's general statement of its plans at the opening of a new session of Parliament. However, a scandal had been discovered in the customs department, and a committee studying the evidence handed in a critical report. King's defense was that his government had already been making an inquiry into customs operations and that the Conservatives had received much of their information from government investigators. This was true, but a preliminary vote showed that King had lost the support of the legislature. King asked the governor-general to dissolve Parliament, but his request was refused.

Encarta