Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Simple answers to simple questions

Rob asks a question about whether Conservative bloggers who normally get in a rage over concessions to Quebec at the perceived expense of western Canada will do so this time now, since its a Conservative administration doing it this time, not a Liberal one.

Simple Answer: No. It will be hailed by them as nation-building by Harper in order to stomp the separatist threat forever (and um, it might be a good way to get Quebeckers to vote for our guy so we can keep our conservative saviour of Canada in power – maybe even with a majority! The ends justify the means, dont you know.)

Thus ends another edition of simple answers to simple questions. (If principled exceptions pop up amongst that group.. I will be certain to credit them).


8 comments to Simple answers to simple questions


    I think equalization should be scrapped anyway. It doesn’t work within the EU and it doesn’t work here.

  • Scott,

    You’re forgetting that Stelmach, the premier, himself is inclined towards firewalling. The first thing he said after being elected was that he would fight for Alberta and ensure that everything Québec got, Alberta would get as well, including being recognized as a nation. So that whole firewall/independence movement is no longer limited to the fringe separatist party – it is now a strong movement within the governing party!!!!! (And those numbers went sky-high right after Ignatieff opened his uninformed mouth and Pandora’s box).

  • Disagree: the Calgary Herald issued a stern warning for Harper yesterday, telling him that if he does that, he’ll lose seats – even in Alberta.

    I don’t care what the Blogging Tories might say (in this case, they really don’t matter, because they’re simply an echo chamber), but Albertans of all stripes, including Conservatives, are extremely mad: first the stupid nation motion and now more equalization nonsense.

    There’s definitely a lot more firewall and independence talk in the air, including from people you’d never have expected to think like that.

  • wilson61

    ”And the BQ don’t care about the West.”
    Nor the East, Maritimes, North or anything other than Quebec separating.

    another Reform Party?
    No, not again.
    Alberta will separate, no threats, we will just do it, because we can.

    PMSH has my full support. 100%
    I have no problem with the Quebec thing, or the West supporting the East. (no NEP !!)
    Breaking the promise to Saskatchewan, BIG problem.
    PMSHs word has to mean something.
    Guess I just can’t let go of my Reform roots, but TRUST is # one on my list.
    This trial balloon better pop.

  • The people who feel BC would go with any Alberta movement are dreaming, unless it was rural northern BC. The urban areas of Vancouver and Victoria and so on are socially and politically as far apart as could be from Alberta (apart from hating Toronto.. but that’s not enough of a reason to separate).

    Considering also that the official “secessionist” party in Alberta got all of 0.3% of the provincial vote in the last election, I’m not exactly quaking in my boots.

  • Gayle

    [quote comment=”845″]And even if that base did want to move, where would it go? See above. They might stay at home, but the Cons had huge pluralities in much of the West. Short of Reform Party II the Cons don’t have to worry.[/quote]

    Well I worry, because Reform Party II is not so crazy as you may think. Yes there is a big love in for Harper out here, but I would not be surprised if another rebellious grass roots party starts out here. There are still a number of people here who think we should separate (and believe that BC will come with us…).

    Sure it would be nice to have another right wing party to split the vote, but speaking as an Albertan I wish the federal government would not keep adding fuel to the resentment out here. I do not agree with the resentment, but I would like to bring my province in from the dark ages at some point…

  • Overall, the western base might get angry but they’re not going anywhere.

    First of all, who is going to make the issue that it’s unfair the Cons are favouring Quebec? Wont’ be the Libs, that’s for sure. The NDP could gain, but they still harbour deluded hopes for seats in Quebec so they generally tow a nationalist line. And the BQ don’t care. And the BQ don’t care about the West.

    And even if that base did want to move, where would it go? See above. They might stay at home, but the Cons had huge pluralities in much of the West. Short of Reform Party II the Cons don’t have to worry.

  • Scott,

    On this one, you’re right, I think. I wrote on the issue, but didn’t really take the “selling Western oil to buy votes in Quebec” angle, which I may have if Martin pulled the same move.

    Is it hypocritical? A little, admittedly. However, I think the difference is “it’s ok for US to do it to ourselves”. It’s kind of like saying the “n-word”… it’s ok for a black person to use it.

    Perception wise, it’s altogether another thing for a Quebec politician to screw over the West’s interests for Quebec (remember how pissed we all were at Mulroney? We even started a new party). That’s the emotional reaction anyways.

    That being said, Conservatives in Saskatchewan will be quite pissed, and if it plays out like it’s expected to, Harper will lose more than a few votes there, I predict. Question is whether he’ll win more in Quebec as a result.

    And, as always, my signature: :em36:

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.