Quebec Election: 4 Sep 12

[PuckChaser]

If Quebec wanted to play hardball with the seaway we could do the same with the Gulf of St. Lawrence like you mentioned. I think they'd have bigger fish to fry (so to speak) than screwing around with the seaway.

 

[a_majoor]

Since it is a Canadian/US International seaway, I doubt the Americans will take very kindly to a third party trying to assert control of the seaway. Quebec might discover the Americans play hardball with a much bigger team and many more bats on that and a host of other issues (attempting to enter NAFTA, especially with the United States still either in recession or recovering will expose a lot of Quebec's protectionist economic regime to irresistible pressure both from the United States and Canada, for example).

Even the debt issue might end up being subjected to a form of repatriations via tariffs, fees and other trade barriers to recoup the Quebec portion of the National Debt (unless we consider Ungava, the Eastern Townships and Montreal to be fair trade) by vengeful governments and voters.

All this assumes the government and voters of Quebec act in a calm rational manner. Gripped by internal dissention as parts of Quebec separate, continuing economic crisis and spiraling decline in standards of living, panic stricken Quebec voters and politicians will flail about with things like economic "stimulus" programs and takeover of companies and business sectors; compounding the problem and turning Quebec from the "Greece of North America" to the "Bangladesh of North America"

All in all, a scenario they should best avoid.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Since it is a Canadian/US International seaway, I doubt the Americans will take very kindly to a third party trying to assert control of the seaway. Quebec might discover the Americans play hardball with a much bigger team and many more bats on that and a host of other issues (attempting to enter NAFTA, especially with the United States still either in recession or recovering will expose a lot of Quebec's protectionist economic regime to irresistible pressure both from the United States and Canada, for example).

Even the debt issue might end up being subjected to a form of repatriations via tariffs, fees and other trade barriers to recoup the Quebec portion of the National Debt (unless we consider Ungava, the Eastern Townships and Montreal to be fair trade) by vengeful governments and voters.

All this assumes the government and voters of Quebec act in a calm rational manner. Gripped by internal dissention as parts of Quebec separate, continuing economic crisis and spiraling decline in standards of living, panic stricken Quebec voters and politicians will flail about with things like economic "stimulus" programs and takeover of companies and business sectors; compounding the problem and turning Quebec from the "Greece of North America" to the "Bangladesh of North America"

[size=13pt]All in all, a scenario they should best avoid.[/size

All in all, a scenario both Canada and Quebec should avoid. There is no, not one good or even just pretty good reason why Quebecers should want to separate; it is a stupid idea. But: it is equally stupid for Canadians to wish to break up their own, first rate country by pushing Quebec out the door just because it is a weak sister.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Edward,

No rational Canadian wants Quebec to leave.

With that said,  out west, I am detecting a pretty big disinclination amongst many people to do Quebec any more favors.  I think he mood is beginning to be one of "why am I paying (through transfer payments) for daycare and low university tuition in Quebec that I cannot get in my own province and, on top of that, get dumped on for having a prosperous resource based economy by the very people benefiting from it?"

 

[Jed]

If you love it (them) let it go. If they come back everything is as it should be; if not they were never yours in the first place.  ;D I couldn't find the flower child smiley.

 

[Infanteer]

With that said,  out west, I am detecting a pretty big disinclination amongst many people to do Quebec any more favors.  I think he mood is beginning to be one of "why am I paying (through transfer payments) for daycare and low university tuition in Quebec that I cannot get in my own province and, on top of that, get dumped on for having a prosperous resource based economy by the very people benefiting from it?"

+1

Having lived in Western Canada for most of my life, I can say this is true.

 

[Remius]

Edward,

No rational Canadian wants Quebec to leave.

With that said,  out west, I am detecting a pretty big disinclination amongst many people to do Quebec any more favors.  I think he mood is beginning to be one of "why am I paying (through transfer payments) for daycare and low university tuition in Quebec that I cannot get in my own province and, on top of that, get dumped on for having a prosperous resource based economy by the very people benefiting from it?"

This is what irks me a bit.  I'm all for criticizing Quebec for actual things but comments about the daycare thing are mostly myth.  It pays for itself.  Transfer payments do not pay for it.  Also a lot of Quebecers do not get the subsidy, either due to long waits or teh provider they are pointed to is less than desirable and people would rather pay more than risk screwing with their child's education.  If we want to get tired about Quebec's situation, cool, but let's use concrete examples, not the tired and false daycare thing.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Are you making the net economic benefit argument or are you arguing that daycare, at 7/ day, pays for itself?

 

[xo31@711ret]

as for one who  lived on the lower north shore when niner-dom did a 4 year RSS posting at HMCS JOLLIET ( I retired from the regs to follow her & did reserves there). Yes, they have cheap daycare etc, but (to me anyway) provincial taxes were just .freakin'. horrendus... Unreal. ..I've been chatting lately on fb etc with inlaws (ninerdom et family are Acadians from the north shore of NB) & friends  I met in Chatham, Gagetown, etc now posted to Quebec. Most are francophones & all are proud Quebecers - Quebecois. The underlying theme I get from them is: once posting is done or ready to retire, theyr'e done & heading west or east; anywhere but Quebec....

 

[Remius]

Are you making the net economic benefit argument or are you arguing that daycare, at 7/ day, pays for itself?

I'm arguing that transfer payments do not go at all towards Quebec's daycare program.  It costs you and the feds 0$.

Quebec is also one of the most taxed geopolitacal areas in the northern hemisphere as well.  And once again, not everyone gets 7$ a day daycare.

 

[Remius]

http://thoughtundermined.com/2012/04/24/equalization-misconceptions/

This is actually a pretty good and simple breakdown of how equalization payments work.  And how the 7$ daycare argument is irrelevant.  A good explanation of why Ontario is in the situation that it is in as well, an explanation that I had wrong too.

 

[Infanteer]

What an interesting blog - thanks for the link Crantor.

It appears that the statement that Alberta funds Quebec's social programs isn't necessarily true.  However, the question still remains - how does a province with a much larger population and a great resource base not pay for its own programs?  Seems like the formula of lots of public benefits and high taxes isn't working?

 

[Kirkhill]

Micro or Macro.

Line item analysis would indeed bolster the position that Quebec doesn't use Alberta dollars to fund baby sitters.

Equally, regardless of how money is routed,  Quebec receives funds.  Alberta doesn't.  If Quebec did not exist then one of two things would happen:

1 Alberta would pay less in taxes to the federal government because it had fewer fiduciary responsibilities
2 Alberta would receive more in services because the federal government had fewer fiduciary responsibilities.

Also, with respect to daycare:

Daycare costs money.  Without the equalization payment then Quebec would have less money.  With less money the decision about repairing overpasses in Montreal or funding Daycare would become harder.


Lawyers, accountants and clerics............

 

[Remius]

What an interesting blog - thanks for the link Crantor.

It appears that the statement that Alberta funds Quebec's social programs isn't necessarily true.  However, the question still remains - how does a province with a much larger population and a great resource base not pay for its own programs?  Seems like the formula of lots of public benefits and high taxes isn't working?

Because its economic output is terrible.  Population size does not matter, the income per capita does.  Rather than attcking Quebec for its provincial social programs, we should be attacking its protectionist policies, strong union meddling and poor trade policies.  The language laws don't help either since they discourage businesses as well.  Quebec could have and has potential but it isn't using it.

While Quebec gets the biggest amount of cash, it is not the biggest recipiant on a per capita basis.

 

[Infanteer]

I think you are right, and I believe Edward made a similar observation a while back.

However, even with bad policies not costing the provinces anything, equalization is still an issue.  As Kirkhill said, Western Canada is right to feel a bit put out as bad policies and protectionism can be masked by equalization payments - a luxury a Republique would not have.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Transfer payments do not pay for it.

Money is highly fungible, and as the article at thoughtundermined.com helpfully points out, there are no conditions attached to equalization transfers.  Equalization transfers contribute to paying for everything.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Canadian "push-back" begins with asbestos according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-to-cease-defending-asbestos-mining/article4545704/

Canada to cease defending asbestos mining

STEVEN CHASE
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail

Published Friday, Sep. 14 2012

The Harper government is throwing in the towel on Quebec’s internationally-maligned asbestos industry now that the Parti Québécois is poised to take power and prohibit extraction of the cancer-causing mineral.

Industry Minister Christian Paradis said Canada will stop defending asbestos mining in international circles and no longer oppose adding chrysotile asbestos to the Rotterdam Convention, a global list of hazardous substances.

He announced Ottawa will offer up to $50-million in assistance for towns dependent on the industry so they can diversify their local economies.

Mr. Paradis, the Tories’ political lieutenant for Quebec, made the announcement Friday in Thetford Mines, Que., his political home town and once a big force in the asbestos mining industry.

Asbestos is a silicate mineral used in building construction that can trigger cancer if it’s inhaled. Its sale is restricted in Canada but large quantities are exported to developing countries. Most forms of asbestos have been banned in the European Union.

The Conservative government didn’t hesitate to take a swipe at the recently-elected PQ for its pledge to shut down the industry.

The Conservative government, which has been an unapologetic defender of asbestos, even in the face of international condemnation, placed blame for its change of heart squarely on Pauline Marois’s PQ government.

“Mrs. Marois’s decision to prohibit chrysotile mining in Quebec will have a negative impact on the future prosperity of the area,” Mr. Paradis said in a statement.

But he said he’s not going to spend any time debating it. “It is clear that Mrs. Marois’s decision is final, and it is not time for ‘academic’ consultations but to take action,” the Tories said in a statement.

“Right now, there are hundreds of workers in the region who do not have a job and live in uncertainty. The last thing they need is a false consultation, when the decision to close down the industry has already been taken by Mrs. Marois.,”

As recently as the 2011 federal election, Prime Minsiter Stephen Harper was defiant in his defence of asbestos during the 2011 federal election.

“Our region will have to live with the consequences of Mrs. Marois’s decision, but we will continue to work together on the continued economic development of the community,” Mr. Paradis.

The minister said Canada will consent to the international community adding chrysotile asbestos to the Rotterdam Convention. “It would be illogical for Canada to oppose the inclusion of chrysotile in annex III of the Rotterdam Convention when Quebec, the only province that produces chrysotile, will prohibit its exploitation,” he said.

This is a repeat of the health care funding decision: no discussions, no federal-provincial meetings, no negotiations ... just a clear, simple announcement. It is classic Stephen Harper.

I don't want to sound like CD 'What's a Million?' Howe, but "up to $50-million in assistance for towns dependent on the industry" is chickenfeed in the 21st century.

I'm guessing that Mme. Marois is spitting mad about this but I suspect it is the shape of things to come for Quebec.

 

[PuckChaser]

Quebec should be happy that they were supported for so long with this mining. They should have started years ago to diversify, but in typical fashion have stuck their heads in the sand and pretended everything would be ok. If Marois wanted to prohibit the extraction, then she can find some money to pony up to help the communities as well, its not the Federal government's job alone.

 

[a_majoor]

A look at the long term strategy of the PQ; inflaming the culture of entitlement. Like many posters here, I see this as a losing strategy since there is no upside for either the Government of Canada to engage, and no longer the pressing need to "have" Quebec in order to win elections. Prime Minister Harper has already demonstrated his approach to the Premiers with a series of "take it or leave it" initiatives; the PQ will come in looking for a fight and discovering they are in an empty room.

The longer term issue of how willing the ROC is to pay for Quebec is also going to hit the agenda sooner or later as provinces are hard pressed to cover their own needs. There is only so much wealth available at any given any time, and the producers of wealth have a very vested interest in its management and stewardship. If monies such as transfer payments are seen as being squandered, then the people providing these monies will start voting for whoever promises to shut the tap. As some have speculated, the PQ might achieve its aim by accident and discover they are at the helm of a "nation" that is bankrupt and adrift in a hostile environment at birth...

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/18/matt-gurney-the-last-thing-marois-wants-is-a-proud-confident-quebec/

Matt Gurney: The last thing Marois wants is a proud, confident Quebec

Matt Gurney | Sep 18, 2012 10:36 AM ET
More from Matt Gurney | @mattgurney

"How low do we feel here in Quebec? This low? No, no. LOWER."

On Monday, Quebec premier-elect Pauline Marois, and 53 other Parti Quebecois victors, were sworn in to Quebec’s National Assembly. This is one of the final symbolic steps required to constitute a new government. Once the opposition members are also sworn in, Marois will be officially invited to form a government and become premier.

On the occasion of her swearing in, Marois took a few moments to congratulate the members of her minority caucus. With 54 MNAs, the PQ is only four seats ahead of the Liberals, who formed the official opposition, and the PQ forms only a slim minority government. Even so, Marois was (understandably) keen to play up her narrow win as a pivot point in Quebec’s history.

“What I hope for is to bring Quebecers together around what unites us,” she told her caucus in a speech after the swearing in. “What I hope for is that Quebec gets back on track, that it finds again its pride, that it gets back its confidence. When a people gets back its pride and its confidence, nothing, nothing, absolutely nothing is impossible,” she said.

Nice sentiment, if a bit overused. And in this instance, it’s worse than just trite fluff. It’s outright untrue. Marois doesn’t want Quebec to get back its confidence. She and the PQ want the province as insulted, insecure and petulant as possible. They said so during the campaign.

Last July, PQ MNA Bernard Drainville spoke with a reporter from The Globe and Mail and laid out how the PQ would exploit frustration and insecurity among the population to promote separatism. Drainville, who was re-elected this month, said that if elected, the PQ would make a series of provocative demands on the federal government.

If Ottawa co-operated, great. That would prove that the PQ could wring more goodies out of the rest of Canada, and that’s never a bad thing for a PQ government to accomplish. But even if it didn’t work, the PQ still saw an upside. Every rejection, every defeat, would just be used to drive a wedge between Ottawa and Quebec.

“I don’t see how we can lose,” he said. “If Quebec wins, it becomes stronger. If Quebec is rebuffed, the demonstration is made that there is a limit to our ability to progress in this country.”

As I wrote at the time, it was a good strategy. Given Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s personal unpopularity in Quebec, it’s not a surprise that the PQ would want to spar with him, publicly. The PQ plan went beyond that, however. If Ottawa rejected its demands — which the current Conservative government would almost have to do, given how accomodating Quebec under threat would go over in the rest of the country — the PQ would hold that up, as Drainville put it, as proof that Quebec has “limited ability to progress.”

Does that sound like, “Nothing, nothing, absolutely nothing is impossible,” to anyone out there?

It’s not that playing the victim card is new for the PQ. “Money and the ethnic vote” comes to mind. As do constant declarations that French is under attack in Quebec, so much so that a store employee greeting a customer with “Bonjour-hi” represents a clear and present danger to the future of the French language and culture in the province, as was suggested — seriously, not ironically — by the PQ earlier this year. Such incidents not only reveal a political culture that is deeply, fundamentally insecure. It also provides an opportunity for a clever party to exploit that insecurity by whipping up enough resentment and collective insult to drive up support for separatism despite Quebec’s economic dependence on the rest of Canada.

It’s good politics for the PQ. But it is certainly not a recipe for a stronger, more confident Quebec. Rather the opposite. A stronger, more confident Quebec wouldn’t need to play games with Ottawa. It would either choose to remain in the Canadian federation or make a rational decision to get its fiscal house in order and leave, without resorting to a strategy of deliberately inflaming grievances for political gain while still demanding more, more, more from the rest of Canada.

A confident Quebec, in other words, would be a province that had no use for the PQ and its plans. No matter what Marois might say, she likes her Quebec as insecure as she can get it.

National Post
mgurney@nationalpost.com

 

[a_majoor]

Starting out by fulfilling campaign promises is good, but since these promises are very similar to those policies followed by the current US administration, we can expect similar results. Big question should be, "when is the Quebec economy going to implode?". Secondary question is "When are Canada's "Have" provinces going to refuse to continue paying for the "Have not" provinces"? We can see the dynamic playing out in Europe, where Germans are resisting efforts to saddle them with the bailout payments for the PIIGS; this is probably going to become the flashpoint in Canadian politics for the next generation (it could take decades to fill in a half trillion dollar hole for Quebec alone, and if the McGuinty government remains on course, there will be another $400 billion debt weighing down Ontario. Between these two provinces alone we have a debt equal to the Federal Debt (and this does not count unfunded liabilities like pensions either)).

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/21/matt-gurney-on-marois-vision-of-an-independent-quebec-that-someone-else-pays-for/

Matt Gurney on Marois’ vision of an independent Quebec, that someone else pays for

Matt Gurney | Sep 21, 2012 11:57 AM ET

Now that Pauline Marois has been sworn in as the Premier of Quebec, she’s gotten right down to work. She had a busy Day 1, with plenty of announcements. She’s moving fast to deliver on her election promises and keep the base happy. There’s something to be said for that. But given that it’s her stated to intention to govern Quebec as if it’s already an independent country, it’s fair to ask if her numbers add up.

Two of her declarations, in particular, bring her plan into question. Marois has, after all, pledged a balanced provincial budget by 2013-14. That matches the timeline contained in the last budget of the now-defeated Charest Liberals, brought down last March. Even if the budget is balanced — and as noted below, that might be easier said than done — Quebec will still grapple with a mind-bogglingly large debt burden. It’s public-sector debt is already at a quarter-trillion dollars, and it’s climbing fast. The cost of servicing that debt is an already problematic $8.2-billion. Should Quebec’s costs of borrowing spike or should the economy falter, it could prove absolutely ruinous.

That’s where Marois starts. Not a good place to be if you’re an incoming premier with pledges to honour. And yet her first day’s worth of promises were expensive.

The first thing she did, to the delight of Quebec’s politically active student leaders, was cancel the planned tuition hikes that led to the prolonged student demonstrations earlier this year. That will leave Quebec with the lowest tuition rates in Canada, and Marois has even signalled her willingness to consider the demands of some students to move Quebec to a zero-tuition model. Even if we assume that that’s merely a political gesture — it never hurts a politician to say they’ll study an idea — there’s still the matter of the tuition hike being cancelled. Where will the money for Quebec’s schools come from? A summit is planned to discuss how to find efficiencies within education, but that will still leave taxpayers funding most of it. Post-secondary education will continue to cost at least the same amount it currently is. Quite likely more.

And then there’s the reluctance to seek new revenues. Even as other provinces and U.S. states race to develop their shale gas resources, the PQ government has already announced that Quebec is out of that business. Not only has it banned exploitation of known shale gas deposits, it’s also banning any exploration for new ones. Many Quebecers are leery about the environmental repercussions of the fracking process used to extract shale gas. It’s indeed a concern.

But other jurisdictions — British Columbia, notably — are devoting their resources into improving the extraction process. Finding a way to get the gas without polluting the environment is a better solution than simply writing off exploration. If some whiz kids in a garage somewhere invent the perfect extraction process tomorrow, Quebec won’t even know where to begin exploiting the resources it never bothered to find. Marois signalled that her would have an open mind on this file at a later date, and would consider future proposals. But while she’s considering, other provinces and states are prospecting.

Marois’ other tweaks are less eye-catching, but they add up. She’s shutting down a nuclear plant and pledging hundreds of millions of dollars for local economic diversification. She’s cancelling a $200-a-year health tax — or “contribution”, as it was called — with promises of making  up the difference by taxing the rich more. That seems to be all the rage these days, but as was discussed extensively when Ontario recently announced its intention to also hike taxes on the rich, the rich are pretty good at avoiding such taxes. Marois has cancelled a certain income stream while promising to replace it with something far less reliable. Politically appealing? No doubt. But risky.

Everything she’s done so far, she promised to do ahead of time. You can’t knock her for failing to live up to her campaign pledges. But appointing a known deficit hawk to be her finance minister isn’t enough to change Quebec’s economic reality. The province is deep in debt, spending more than it brings in and has already made it harder to dig itself out of that hole. If this is how Marois thinks an independent Quebec would operate, she’d better hope the rest of Canada is willing to keep the equalization payments rolling in. Except then, we’d call it foreign aid.

National Post
mgurney@nationalpost.com