City-state provinces in Canada? Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver

[mariomike]

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like if / when the GTA goes its own way, there will be 5 million people left in Ontario.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like if / when the GTA goes its own way, there will be 5 million people left in Ontario.

Give or take, yes. Still the second biggest province then

 

[daftandbarmy]

City-states would not help us.

We need to change the fact that our governments at the federal and provincial level are chosen by the special interests inherent in a few large cities and the rest of us be damned.

What we'd need to do is find a way to severely reduce the impact of the votes of people living in population-dense areas.

Re-arranging voting districts to give an actual balance between east and west would help, but ultimately you need to come back to a system where the denser your population; the less power that vote has.

None of this is my ideal solution (which is service guarantees citizenship) but it's something.

Alternatively, governments could do a better job at educating citizens, and voters, in all areas about the unique situations and specific needs/ change drivers facing their home province. And not just from a political slant near election time. It should be easier to do in population dense areas like cities.

Educated citizens make better voters, and citizens.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

No, the philosopher king had his followers here in Canada.  They are betting on his heir just now.

No.  The "judge" has limited powers - much like those of a constitutional monarch, or his/her rep - much as we have today. 

Likewise, I accept a uniformity of representation, in the Commons.

My point is that the Senate should not just be a home for Regions, or even Provinces.  Make it a home for Churches (read that as Synagogues and Mosques and Gurdwaras and Mandirs and Kamis etc), for Greenpeace, for Unions, Rotarians, Lions, for any organization that can sign up a minimum number of followers - provisions being made to prevent one voter from supporting too many organizations.

Unless PET and Trudeau Jr lived in ancient Greece I don't think that Plato was referencing them.

The point is that aside from the notion of the "philosopher king" asking for a completely neutral judge isn't feasible. Everyone will have self interest to some level. Even the King/Queen or president have some interests, unless we make them figureheads (like the monarchy).

I agree on the senate and think there would be some value in having equal representation for each province. The trouble would be the inevitable reversion to party-ism, so instead of a senate with, say, 23 senators (2/province, 1/territory) you would end up with 13 Liberal/10 conservative (or however the numbers work out).

 

[mariomike]

Give or take, yes. Still the second biggest province then

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Alternatively, governments could do a better job at educating citizens, and voters, in all areas about the unique situations and specific needs/ change drivers facing their home province. And not just from a political slant near election time. It should be easier to do in population dense areas like cities.

Educated citizens make better voters, and citizens.

Some issues that play in a large CMA like Toronto (public transport as an example) hold little interest to rural areas and vice versa.

You could educate people in downtown Toronto on the need for regulations and rules surrounding agriculture, but making them care is a completely different thing. Very few people vote based on "big ideas" but rather with their pocketbooks or proximity. Convincing that downtown Toronto individual that agricultural policies can save them or make them money is the only practical way to make them care enough to change their voting preference on this issue. Outside of that, they will prefer to spend money on public transport and other Toronto-centric factors since it directly impacts them.  :2c:

 

[jmt18325]

Give or take, yes. Still the second biggest province then

If Quebec remains whole, wouldn't that make Ontario sans the GTA or GTHA the 3rd biggest?

 

[Kirkhill]

Unless PET and Trudeau Jr lived in ancient Greece I don't think that Plato was referencing them.

The point is that aside from the notion of the "philosopher king" asking for a completely neutral judge isn't feasible. Everyone will have self interest to some level. Even the King/Queen or president have some interests, unless we make them figureheads (like the monarchy).

I agree on the senate and think there would be some value in having equal representation for each province. The trouble would be the inevitable reversion to party-ism, so instead of a senate with, say, 23 senators (2/province, 1/territory) you would end up with 13 Liberal/10 conservative (or however the numbers work out).

Plato wasn't.  But Trudeau Sr.'s fans were.

And that is why the neutral judge should have limited powers - just as our constitutional monarch (and/or GG) has.

I agree that faction will always happen. 

I just happen to believe that every now and then we should attempt to shove everybody back into their corners and make them work for their positions.  A little constructive disruption from time to time is good for the soul.

Hence the merits of Brexit, Trump, a reformed Senate and Canadian city-states.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Actually, I think that making more small provinces is the worst possible choice ... all that accomplishes is to make the federal government more intrusive by making it "needed" to effect fiscal redistribution. We would do better to have five larger provinces:

    1. Pacific Canada (BC + YU: population 4.7 million);
    2. The Prairies (AB + SK + MB + NT + NU: 6.6 million);
    3. Ontario (13.6 million);
    4. Quebec (8.2 million); and
    5. Atlantic Canada (NS + NB + NL + PE: population 2.4 million).

Or we might have, my preference, just three:

          A. Canada West (population 11.3 million);
          B. Central Canada (population 13.6 million; and
          C. Canada East, a bilingual province with a distinctively French flair, population 10.6 million).

The three province solution would, I think, improve productivity and intra-national trade and commerce thereby improving our overall prosperity and it would render the national, central government less "necessary" and, therefore, cause parts of it (powers) to migrate back where they belong (constitutionally) and it would, eventually, grow smaller and cheaper to operate and, thereby again, better focused on its core responsibilities.

 

[mariomike]

Reply #3,
• Greater Toronto Area (GTA) taxpayers pay out almost $24 billion more in taxes than they receive in government spending—a net tax burden equal to 11 percent of the GTA economy

If Quebec remains whole, wouldn't that make Ontario sans the GTA or GTHA the 3rd biggest?

The GTA should have gone its own way years ago.

 

[Kirkhill]

Actually, I think that making more small provinces is the worst possible choice ... all that accomplishes is to make the federal government more intrusive by making it "needed" to effect fiscal redistribution. We would do better to have five larger provinces:

    1. Pacific Canada (BC + YU: population 4.7 million);
    2. The Prairies (AB + SK + MB + NT + NU: 6.6 million);
    3. Ontario (13.6 million);
    4. Quebec (8.2 million); and
    5. Atlantic Canada (NS + NB + NL + PE: population 2.4 million).

Or we might have, my preference, just three:

          A. Canada West (population 11.3 million);
          B. Central Canada (population 13.6 million; and
          C. Canada East, a bilingual province with a distinctively French flair, population 10.6 million).

The three province solution would, I think, improve productivity and intra-national trade and commerce thereby improving our overall prosperity and it would render the national, central government less "necessary" and, therefore, cause parts of it (powers) to migrate back where they belong (constitutionally) and it would, eventually, grow smaller and cheaper to operate and, thereby again, better focused on its core responsibilities.

ERC.

You talk efficiency.  I'm talking democracy.  Democracy isn't efficient.  Dictatorship is highly efficient.

You can only start to achieve a sense of balance when democracy occurs locally, when everybody feels connected to their neighbour and their communal fate.  Large bodies create distance that results in a loss of connection.

Chretien said he would never ask Ralph to write him a check.  Implicit in that was that Chretien owned the cash and Ralph and his followers got it on sufferance.

In point of fact Confederation is built on the notion of Canada being a collection of self financing provinces each, in turn, composed of individual communities that raised funds for their own churches, their own schools and their own doctors and hospitals.

Community started locally.

I agree with the notion that the Feds are excessively intrusive.  I don't agree that the answer is more petty dictators.

 

[GR66]

ERC.

You talk efficiency.  I'm talking democracy.  Democracy isn't efficient.  Dictatorship is highly efficient.

You can only start to achieve a sense of balance when democracy occurs locally, when everybody feels connected to their neighbour and their communal fate.  Large bodies create distance that results in a loss of connection.

Chretien said he would never ask Ralph to write him a check.  Implicit in that was that Chretien owned the cash and Ralph and his followers got it on sufferance.

In point of fact Confederation is built on the notion of Canada being a collection of self financing provinces each, in turn, composed of individual communities that raised funds for their own churches, their own schools and their own doctors and hospitals.

Community started locally.

I agree with the notion that the Feds are excessively intrusive.  I don't agree that the answer is more petty dictators.

I agree with ERC on the benefits of having fewer, larger provinces and the Federal Government devolving some of their accrued powers back to the provinces where they were originally intended.  But at the same time I think it would be equally important for the Provinces to devolve some of their powers down to the municipal level including more ways of raising taxes.

Three levels of democracy each with their own powers (divided so that they really reflect respective National, Provincial and Local interests) with each level of government having the ability to raise the funds required to fulfill their respective obligations to their citizens.

 

[McG]

Actually, I think that making more small provinces is the worst possible choice ... all that accomplishes is to make the federal government more intrusive ...

Is that like federal politicians pondering the idea of making certain cities bilingual?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberal-committee-chair-eyes-making-city-of-ottawa-officially-bilingual/article31908535/

 

[Halifax Tar]

What if, and this a wild idea, we empowered our municipal governments more and made them responsible for lots of things that the Provincial and Federal levels look after.  To better reflect the ideals and needs of the immediate community it serves.

This way small localities in say Alberta could ensure their way of life is less obstructed by whims of local concern in say Quebec.

Take firearms as a issue.  While many/most people in the GTA may be repulsed buy firearm ownership that shouldn't impact someone in Churchill Manitoba's decision or ability to own firearms. 

Let the federal government handle things outside the country, provincial a broad and lessened role looking after provincial issue and  municipal getting the lions share of work and the redistribution of funds to support that.

I'm not talking about a full restructuring of government more redefined PDR Part 1s ( Like that CFPAS reference ? ) for the levels of government and the fiscal support to accompany that.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I can tell you that as a Federal regulator, I have had to "remind" both municipalities and Provincial government departments of the limits of their mandate when they wrongful imposed things onto citizens. In small towns disputes I have been asked to intervene because we are seen not to have a dog in the fight, I also have people trying to drag us into their local fights to screw the other side. Personally I find Municipalities and Regional districts the most intrusive and rigid of all types of government. I also find it almost amusing when they complain that our Federal requirements are to strict and they should get a free pass, I love asking if their city hall does the same for their permits. The Feds have a lot of our own problems, but generally it's a ponderous beast that may squish you without realizing your there. 

 

[mariomike]

Read this recently on Milnet.ca , "Poor, rural and small town Canada gets paid by urban Canada, simple as that."

The GTA can always dream of the independence enjoyed by Prince Edward Island, but I doubt it will become a reality any time soon.

Metro Chairman Godfrey brought it up back in the 1970's in front of a Royal Commission.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending upon one's political point of view,

"Political observers say the change is unlikely to happen, given it would require the approval of Parliament and seven of the provinces, with at least 50 per cent of the population."
Toronto Star March 16, 2010

What Ontario premier wants to go down in history as the one who lost the GTA? Not just votes in another provincial election. I mean permanently lost it.

 

[Kirkhill]

Read this recently on Milnet.ca , "Poor, rural and small town Canada gets paid by urban Canada, simple as that."

The GTA can always dream of the independence enjoyed by Prince Edward Island, but I doubt it will become a reality any time soon.

Metro Chairman Godfrey brought it up back in the 1970's in front of a Royal Commission.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending upon one's political point of view,

"Political observers say the change is unlikely to happen, given it would require the approval of Parliament and seven of the provinces, with at least 50 per cent of the population."
Toronto Star March 16, 2010

What Ontario premier wants to go down in history as the one who lost the GTA? Not just votes in another provincial election. I mean permanently lost it.

Torxit?  >

 

[mariomike]

Torxit?  >

"If you love something, let it go..." 

Like when a chick says, "We need to talk..."  ( The four worst words in the English language. ) 

 

[George Wallace]

What Ontario premier wants to go down in history as the one who lost the GTA? Not just votes in another provincial election. I mean permanently lost it.

Hell; we'd have to move the Legislature to Hamilton or Windsor.  Then where would we be?

 

[Journeyman]

Hell; we'd have to move the Legislature to Hamilton or Windsor. 

Hamilton.  Sheila Copps already stole HMCS Haida and moved it to Hamilton where no one will see it. 

They may as well have the Provincial Legislature too, in the hopes that no one will hear from them.  ;D