So, George Stroumboulopoulos is to host Rogers version of Hockey Night in Canada next season.
The tradition of HNIC on CBC is one of our national anchors, or treasures even. I’m torn about this. On one hand, free enterprise should be alive and well, and bidders should win contracts based on the ability to deliver a quality product at a competitive price: but George Stroumboulopoulos?
I dunno. I disliked it when CBC fired Dave Hodge, and the young whippersnapper who they brought in to replace him (Ron MacLean) worked out just fine. Time will tell.
George is a pretty talented guy; I think he might be able to pull it off. As it mentions in the article, he was a sports guy before he was anything else. I’ve always enjoyed his interviews - he does his homework, and is quite personable.
So, Olivia Chow to run for Toronto Mayor. (Former NDP leader Jack Layton’s widow, for anyone who has been living under a rock for the last five years. ) Very interesting! Any idea if she’ll be able to oust Rob Ford, anyone?
(As an aside, in case you’re wondering like I was after watching her speak, she had a viral infection that has temporarily paralyzed the left side of her face.)
It never fails to amaze me how much of the separatist pitch to Quebecers hinges on pretending that separation will involve not really separating. “Gosh no, we won’t change currency. In fact, we’ll have a say in the Bank of Canada! And no passports, no tariffs!” I cannot believe people believe such absurdities.
I get the impression that they don’t realize that when they separate they’ll give up every iota of leverage that they have when negotiating with the federal government as a province.
But why would they want to use the Loonie anyways? With Quebec gone the Loonie is even more of a petrobuck, which will result in currency valuations unfavourable to them. Unless they really think they’ll have a meaningful say in monetary policy, which is utter lunacy.
I don’t think it benefits the rest of Canada to get drawn into the hypothetical question of our negotiating position. It is already asserted by separatists that the rejection of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords means that the rest of Canada doesn’t want Québec to stay.
In the event of a majority ‘Yes’ vote in a third referendum, we will sit down and negotiate a new relationship. There is nothing that I’ve heard the separatists say that I would agree to. But if I go saying “No, you’ll have to get your own passports and your own embassies. No, you aren’t automatically in NAFTA. No, any interprovincial agreements are automatically null and void - you can start paying Newfoundland and Labrador market value for the Hydro-electric power generated by Churchill Falls, or they can cut the lines to Québec.”, I will be viewed as a fear-monger. Threatening a group of people into staying never works out.
That being said, I find it baffling that the Québécois have lived with Anglo culture for some 254 years, and they’ve never encountered what happens when an Anglo’s pride is insulted. I think it would be the least helpful thing I could possibly do, and yet, I just feel like screaming at Pauline Marois “Don’t tell me what I’m going to do, because I don’t even know what I would do if that happened. If you’re asking what I feel like doing, I’ll tear up the highways, the railroads and blockade the St. Lawrence river! If you want to break it off, you’re going to Goddamn well feel broken by the time we’re through with you! Remember the Faulklands?”
Like I say, I don’t think that would be helpful, but FUCK! Do you not know us, you daftie?
We’ve capitulated because we want them to stay. Once they decide to leave, every concession we’ve ever made to Québec will have been in vain. I know I wouldn’t be in a conciliatory mood (see some of Spoons’ and Muffin’s remarks about divorce cases).
We know that, but what have we done but give them the idea that the ROC will always just roll over for them? It’s human nature to expect that things will always be as they have always been.
I should say that I’m not excusing it in any way - I’m just giving my perspective on how I can see a group coming to that way of thinking.
Because separation would require a constitutional amendment. Our constitution does not currently have provisions for the secession of a province, so it would have to be amended to allow for secession.
And a constitutional amendment would require the consent of Canada, and either the 7/50 formula, or the consent of all ten provinces. I’m unsure which, as we’ve never travelled this path before, but it boils down to this: if Quebec wants to secede, it will have to get most, if not all, of the other provinces on-board with the idea.
This means that Quebec can no longer demand, expecting Canada to capitulate. Oh, it can demand, of course, but if it expects to get Canada and the provinces on-board, it is going to have to realize that it is not going to get all that it demands, and that it will have to make some concessions.
If Canada was a car, Quebec would be that one wiper that even though when you stopped at the intersection and reached your hand out the window and grabbed it as it swung near then let it go to slam the build-up off it, it keeps fucking up and making a smeary mess of the windshield so you can’t see for shit.
I honestly have no idea how anyone in Quebec could think that, after fighting for and gaining sovereignty, that we would let them be anything less than sovereign. If you want to use Canadian currency go ahead but why would you expect Canada to foot the bill for any sovereign responsibility held by Quebec anymore than you would expect us to do the same for Spain, the U.K., or the USA?
) Very interesting! Any idea if she’ll be able to oust Rob Ford, anyone?