Conference kaosws::canada

    
    .1 was not a bad comment at all.
    
    Sovereingty Association is not easy to explain but goes something
    like this. An independent state that would make its own international
    treaties, trading regulations, law system, etc except that it would
    use Canadian money, defense, and other things and would still have
    some of its social services recognized throughout the country such
    as medical insurance plan, etc.
    
    The closest existing example that I can think of is the relationship
    between Monaco and France.
    
    Others will probably explain it much better than I.
    
    Roger

    Monaco's status is somewhat idealized. Monaco citizens are very
    few, and this citizenship is almost impossible to acquire (even
    by marrying one of the princesses). Monaco residents under specific
    conditions, can benefit of a special tax status. This special status
    is granted by the French Ministry of Revenue and most often applies
    only to Corporation. Basically Monaco is a French competitive offering
    for international businesses head offices which find Geneva to
    expensive. The "country" receives all of its service from France
    (utilities, public work, health care system, etc...). There is only
    25,000 residents (not all citizens). The main business is tourism
    (Casino) and a fairly large commercial bradcasting system (owned at
    50% by the French state broadcasting administration, SOFIRAD).
    Until the 60s all of the tourism assets (casino, hotels, etc...) were
    owned by Onassis' Societe des bains de mers. A major dispute with
    the French Revenue ended up in the sale of it to a local group (financed
    by a French development company). The control of the Monaco citizenship
    status is subject to french approval, and all attempt by the prince
    to have some control over the fiscal law or the military status of
    his subjects have been unsuccessful so far (they can be called to
    serve in French Army like all other French Citizens, although it
    rarely happens outside wartime). With the 1992 collapse of all trade
    barriers in Europe, Monaco part as a tax shelter is bound to
    diminish, and they are investing heavily into tourism. Which means
    that their "souverainete" is of little advantage, and they, like
    all other europeans, are looking for more association.
    
    I hope Quebec as better model to look up to for its souverainete
    association (wanna try Andorra, San marino or Vatican ?). 

    There is a whole continuum of inter-country relationships, and some are
    more independent than others. Consider the `independent' countries of
    the European Community, who, after 1992 will be a lot less independent
    than the individual states in the U.S., which function collectively as
    one country...
    
    Was Canada independent from Britain after the British North America Act
    of 1867? The Statute of Westminster of 1931? The Charter of Rights &
    Freedoms of 1982? Yes, on all three counts - but to varying degrees.
    
    ...laura

Re .6

I assure you that R.H. Mrs. Thatcher would go never allow lessening
in the sovereignty of Britain. She doesn't even like the Single
Market Act itself. 

The comparison with the U.S. (or indeed with the USSR) is very ill
informed indeed. 

As for the B.N.A. Act, this established a 'dominion'. A country
formed by an act of (any) parliament is hardly a constitutional
basis. 

Joe
ex-Of Brampton

    How is my comparison `ill-informed'?

    The only problem I can see with the comparison is that most of the
    States formed a Union at a very young stage in their lives, and as
    such did not have the same degree of history preventing co-operation.
    
    The reference to Mrs Thatcher was probably accurate in that she
    probably would be very reluctant to release much British Sovereignty
    to a European partnership when push comes to shove, and most European
    countries are likely the same.
    
    The union of the USSR was imposed, on the other hand, predominantly
    by force.
    
    
    Stuart

     >>>  As of now ( April 1990) is Canada two nations ?
        Or ten provinces 
          Any opinions, that might help those of Us who are still
    ambivalent about this whole issue ? 
        <<<
     
       In Quebec, the people wwere sold,by Georges-Etienne Cartier,
    the  concept of two founding nations.
        
        The rest of Canada was sold the concept of ten provinces in
    a confederation, all equals.
     This was in 1866-67. 
    
    This is still the prevailing state.
    
    Scooter

>       In Quebec, the people wwere sold,by Georges-Etienne Cartier,
>    the  concept of two founding nations.
    
    As the rest of Canada saw it the two founding nations concept is the
    idea that the Canadian culture and language were acquired from England
    and France and has no political strings ... after all Canada, including
    Quebec had been an English colony.
    
    Are you suggesting that Quebeckers see the two founding nations
    concept as French Quebec and English Canada and as a political
    distinction, rather like Quebec declares that the "distinct society" 
    clause in Meech means nothing political, except that the rest of Canada
    is taking it that way ?
    
    Stuart

    The only problem I have with the notion of two founding nations is that
    it is obsolete. Had Canada stayed as it was in 1867, it would remain
    accurate - but there were *many* founding nations in the West.
    
    I heard a comment on the radio this morning suggesting that the
    approach to a multicultural nation was to emulate Belgium or
    Switzerland, which practise a strict separation of the two cultures.
    How would people feel about a unilingual and uniculturally French
    Quebec, and a unilingual and uniculturally English rest of Canada?
    
    ...laura

    
    Interesting note Laura...from my understanding and I hope this is
    correct...the French and Flemish speaking people of Belgium also
    do not see eye to eye on many things.
    
    

    Re -.2,
    
    	This is an area where both the western red-necks and the diehard
    separatists would see eye to eye.
    
    Jean
    

    re .13
    
    You are so right, the Flemish and French definitely do not see eye
    to eye, and Vlanderen has proposed separation from Belgium on numerous
    occasions.  I don't think emulating Belgium would make any difference.
    
    Almost the same thing in Switzerland from what I recall, although I've
    not heard of separatist movements as such, but there is a lot of inter-
    racial snobbery and they have 3 languages and cultures to contend with
    (French, German and Italian).
    
    

    Switzerland actually has 4 offical languages; french, italian,
    swiss-german and a language called romanich (sp) which is only spoken
    in a small area in the mountains around Chur.
    
    Alan

    
    Yugoslavia is also an example...4-5 different groups..all speak
    different languages and since the death of Tito things have been
    very uneasy over there.
    

The fourth language in Switzerland is Romansh (or in German romaunsch,
or in French romanche, alternate English is Rumantsch or Grishun).

It is basically an "in-home" language; that is, although an official
language, every speaker of the language must know another language,
usually German, to be able to survive.

Romansh is a Rhaetian dialect related to French and spoken by about 50,000
people.  Two other major Rhaetian dialects are more closely related to
Italian:  Ladin, spoken by 12,000 people, and Friulian, spoken by 500,000.

/john

    Just to get back on topic here.  Why should the rest of Canada support
    sovereignty association with people who no longer wish to be Canadian?
    It would seem to me that if Quebec wishes this type of association with
    the rest of Canada that there should be a minimum timeframe to allow for
    financial readjustment, but before voting in their referendum it should
    be made perfectly clear to all Quebecers that they are on their own!
    No way should Canadians offer one penny to a people who have split this
    country down the middle.  Canadian tax money should be used to get
    Canada back onto the road to being productive and self-supporting with
    a surplus instead of a deficit.  Let's see how interested Quebecers are
    in having their own country when they aren't being financially propped
    up by the rest of Canada.  Long live the Quebec franc!
    
    I think it's time to play hardball!
    
    Don
    

    I heard an interesting interview on the CBC this morning, with a
    politician discussing sovereignty association for the province he
    represented. No, it wasn't Bourassa. Nor was it Parizeau.
    
    It was Bill Vander Zalm. This is getting serious.
    
    ...laura

    And if you talk to people from Vancouver island, THEY want to separate
    from BC, at least all Canadians seem to agree on one subject.
    
    Jean
    

    Let's set up thousands of little fifedoms all over the country ...
    so that we are left with Canada as just Parliament Hill with which
    we all have an association .... solve all the problems.  Every state
    would be sovereign, the Feds would be stripped of 99 44/100% of their
    powers so they couldn't force anything on anybody.
    
    Hmmmmph! 
    
    Stuart

    re .22
    
 >   Let's set up thousands of little fifedoms all over the country ...
    
    Well, by my reckoning, there is one Fifedom, on the east coast of
    Scotland, between the Forth and the Tay.
    
    And, whilst in nit-picking mode,
    	"agenda" in Latin is already plural - the singular is "agendum",
    meaning a thing to be done. So, if "agenda" in English is singular,
    it's plural should be formed in the English way.
    
    Tony

    Nit nit nit ....  
    
    You know what is meant ... and a fifedom is an accepted, if rare, term
    and does not imply reference to Fifedom other than by comparison.
    
    OK ... so I got the plural wrong ... 
    
    Got anything *USEFUL* to add to this discussion ???
    

    re .24
    
    Are you sure you don't mean "fiefdom"? :-)
    
    Now, I don't know whether this is "*USEFUL*", but would a change in
    the status of Quebec put it outside the U.S.-Canada free trade area?
    
    Tony

    If Meech had been ratified, there would be no wondering.

    Meech was so full of holes that if it had passed it would still have 
    left us wondering.  
    
    If Meech had passed do you imagine that the PQ and other separatists in
    Quebec would have accepted that?  They would still be saying that they
    had been 'humiliated' by English Canada, and that Canada was not whole-
    heartedly behind the deal, and that they don't understand.  The
    separatists have been using these emotive terms so much just recently
    that some of the ordinary folks are starting to believe them!  
    
    The politicians are playing games, but I think (and hope) that the 
    ordinary French Canadians in Quebec will see through that.  It's time 
    everyone realized that politians don't solve problems -- they make 
    them.  
    
    -Gerry

    Hey Glenn, are you supporting me in my quest because I supported the
    grand canal?
    
    For people to meet, they only need to go half way, we did but then we
    were told "since you moved first, you may as well keep going and go the
    full distance" is this Canadian compromise?
    
    Jean
    

    Jean,

    	I am supporting you in your quest only because you thought
    whirly-twirlies should be allowed in NDG between consummated adults.

    Glenn

    <<< Note 283.21 by MQOFS::DESROSIERS "Lets procrastinate....tomorrow" >>>
                                -< separation >-

>>>And if you talk to people from Vancouver island, THEY want to separate
    from BC, at least all Canadians seem to agree on one subject.
    
    Jean
    
This is somewhat true because most of the immigrants that come
from the Orient settle in Vancouver and lower Fraser Valley. The
Islanders feel that they are paying taxes to support all these
hordes of immigrants; however, the problem in Vancouver is that
the Chinese from Hong Kong are spending BIG to buy real estate by
paying CASH$$$ for the houses, driving prices way out of the
market value.

calvin