CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1004
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:17 pm
 


The United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, called “Brexit” for short, shambles on with no end in sight.

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May’s proposed Brexit deal with the European Union was ignominiously voted down by the British Parliament, and May narrowly survived a no-confidence vote that would have toppled her government.

There are rumblings that Scotland may decide to leave the United Kingdom, and that Northern Ireland would also secede and formally join the rest of Ireland. British business leaders are warning about the economic headaches that could result from losing access to the European market.

Watching the Brexit debate from across the Atlantic, I’m reminded of how similar Brexit is to the debates over Quebec separation nearly 25 years ago, and the more recent rumblings in Alberta that we should separate from Canada. What the separatists didn’t consider – and still don’t in the case of Alberta – is how Brexit shows that a separation referendum wouldn’t be the end of their problems, it would just be the beginning.

For one thing, if Brexit goes ahead the United Kingdom itself could fracture with the departure of Scotland and Northern Ireland. In 1995, many people were saying if Quebec separated from Canada, parts of Quebec that wanted to rejoin Canada, such as Indigenous communities, had the right to do so. They encouraged the federal government to play hardball with a separate Quebec on the issue. A separate Alberta would be just as divisible as Quebec.

And then there are the economic problems that would result. In 1995, people were urging Ottawa to take a hard line on negotiating things like the use of the Canadian dollar and taking a share of the national debt. The rest of Canada would no doubt take a hard line with a separate Alberta, too. Both a separate Quebec and Alberta would be subject to any tariffs the rest of Canada or the United States decided to levy against them.

And no, the rest of Canada would not be required to let Alberta build a pipeline through its territory, either. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea doesn’t impact infrastructure built on land to get products to port – and even if it did, the rest of Canada would still be free to levy tariffs against our oil or anything else.

Aside from all the formal political problems, Brexit has led to serious fault lines in British society. The country is polarized between “Leave” and “Remain” supporters. Even if Brexit itself is quickly resolved, the acrimony in the UK itself is likely to fester for much longer. Who here in Canada can forget the ill will that’s resulted from the 1995 Quebec referendum, especially since we never actually resolved the issues that caused it?

Quebec separatists in 1995 and Alberta separatists today came across as acting like separation would magically cure all of their provinces’ problems, whether language retention or oil pricing issues. As Brexit shows, separation likely wouldn’t solve these problems.

It would just make them worse.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33036
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:41 am
 


If Alberta left, we'd still be land locked. But instead of the Federal government's ability to control interprovincial trade, we'd have a hostile country able to screw us even harder for our resources and transit through their territory.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8754
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:02 am
 


DrCaleb wrote:
If Alberta left, we'd still be land locked. But instead of the Federal government's ability to control interprovincial trade, we'd have a hostile country able to screw us even harder for our resources and transit through their territory.

But If Alberta seperated.... we'd become the glorious State of Alberta!


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33036
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:20 am
 


llama66 wrote:
DrCaleb wrote:
If Alberta left, we'd still be land locked. But instead of the Federal government's ability to control interprovincial trade, we'd have a hostile country able to screw us even harder for our resources and transit through their territory.

But If Alberta seperated.... we'd become the glorious State of Alberta!


Only if we became an island in the Pacific.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8754
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:26 am
 


We can identify as an island in the Pacific...


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 29341
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:30 am
 


What's so glorious about it? [door]


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33036
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:32 am
 


Japan might object to losing it's status as the largest Pacific Island.

But we can all get together with Vancouver island and have parades once a year!


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33036
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:33 am
 


raydan wrote:
What's so glorious about it? [door]


The lack of anyone representing the Parti Quebecois. [boxing]


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2548
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:07 am
 


DrCaleb wrote:
If Alberta left, we'd still be land locked. But instead of the Federal government's ability to control interprovincial trade, we'd have a hostile country able to screw us even harder for our resources and transit through their territory.

Incorrect!

Canada is a signatory to the Rights of Access of Land Locked States to and from the Sea and Freedom of Transit (say that 10 times fast!)

It would actually be easier for Alberta to ship her products if she separated.

Canada would be forced to remove herself from the UN, or allow transit. Period.

The only reason it can be stopped now, is because it is an INTERNAL matter. If it ever becomes an EXTERNAL matter, external rules apply.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33832
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:34 am
 


peck420 wrote:
Canada is a signatory to the Rights of Access of Land Locked States to and from the Sea and Freedom of Transit (say that 10 times fast!)

It would actually be easier for Alberta to ship her products if she separated.

Canada would be forced to remove herself from the UN, or allow transit. Period.

The only reason it can be stopped now, is because it is an INTERNAL matter. If it ever becomes an EXTERNAL matter, external rules apply.


Where in the everlovingfuck do you learn about shit like this ? :lol: :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 29341
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:51 am
 


DrCaleb wrote:
raydan wrote:
What's so glorious about it? [door]


The lack of anyone representing the Parti Quebecois. [boxing]

Touché... :D


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8272
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:05 am
 


peck420 wrote:
DrCaleb wrote:
If Alberta left, we'd still be land locked. But instead of the Federal government's ability to control interprovincial trade, we'd have a hostile country able to screw us even harder for our resources and transit through their territory.

Incorrect!

Canada is a signatory to the Rights of Access of Land Locked States to and from the Sea and Freedom of Transit (say that 10 times fast!)

It would actually be easier for Alberta to ship her products if she separated.

Canada would be forced to remove herself from the UN, or allow transit. Period.

The only reason it can be stopped now, is because it is an INTERNAL matter. If it ever becomes an EXTERNAL matter, external rules apply.

Would that apply even to a pipeline? A pipeline would have to be built across Canadian territory. Wouldn’t that amount to giving up sovereignty over the corridor, especially if it only carried Alberta oil?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27930
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:52 pm
 


Separation is an emotional reaction to the perception of being unfairly subject to unwarranted disrespect & contempt from the rest of the country. It's also a reaction to being given practically no help from the federal government in a time of crisis, even after providing one-third to one-half of national revenues to Ottawa for the better part of the last ten years.

If Canada can correct their two failings, a terribly contemptuous point of view towards other Canadians and a lead-footed "ho-hum" response to actual economic emergency, that trigger separatist sentiments then the problem goes away quickly. Leave the situation to fester & keep doing nothing and it will only get worse.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2548
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:53 pm
 


fifeboy wrote:
Would that apply even to a pipeline? A pipeline would have to be built across Canadian territory. Wouldn’t that amount to giving up sovereignty over the corridor, especially if it only carried Alberta oil?


I am not sure, too be honest. I, personally, don't think it would, as the transit portion of that clause does, in my opinion, imply that the transit is temporary, even if it is continuously operated. If that makes sense.

Granted, I doubt that Canada would blink at giving it to Alberta, lest they tempt the US and the St. Lawrence.

It's not like Alberta would be the threat, the threats would be watching how Canada dealt with their UNCLOS commitments, knowing full well that global acceptance of UNCLOS protects a couple specific Canadian access ways.

No, this does not mean I support separation.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2548
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:55 pm
 


Thanos wrote:
Leave the situation to fester & keep doing nothing and it will only get worse.

This right here is the be all and end all of Alberta separatism...if any officials are watching.

Definitive answers. That is it. A yes is a yes, and a no is a no....assuming all parties being honest, which is covered by different laws any way. Gives certainty, does not compromise anyone else in Canada over another.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 116 posts ]  1  2  3  4  5 ... 8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.