The Western Separatist Papers has been
published (usually) monthly by W.S.P. Ltd. since 1983. Address all
correspondence to WSP, Box 101, 255 Menzies Street, Victoria, B.C. Western Canada V8V 2G6.
A one-year subscription is $15.00. Members of the Western Canada Concept receive
the WSP with their membership.
Send e-mail to kzubko@shaw.ca. Visit the WCC on the web at: www.westcan.org
Phone us at: 250-727-3438
or fax us at: 250-479-3294
This September will mark 20 years that I have been publishing the Western Separatist Papers through many ups and downs, times of enthusiastic support and times of self-destructive apathy and despair on the part of Western Canadians. I have seen the movement grow and abate, with the tides of alienation and optimism. I have been encouraged by the efforts of brave and wonderful people like Robert and Gladys Kratchmer, who recently took over for Doug during the tour of Alberta, and I have been discouraged by those who have failed to respond to those efforts to reason and seek solutions to the undeniable difficulties of Western Canada’s position in Canada.
Despite the discouragement of the recent tour, I am not giving up on Western Canadians. I am however, going to take a leave of absence from publishing the newsletter for awhile to give myself time to deal with a health challenge in the next few months, having been diagnosed with an early, non-invasive form of breast cancer. I don’t know what the near future holds, but you will either be receiving an extension on your subscription, or will be kept informed somehow.
Thanks to all of those with their positive attitudes and encouragement for a free West!
In an article entitled, “Curing western alienation a risky gambit, Chretien warns,” by David Vienneau, of the CanWest News Service published on Friday, May 23, 2003, we get some insight into why the problem of the west in Confederation will never be solved. If the Prime Minister believes that , “It's risky gambit for any prime minister to stake his reputation on reducing western alienation because Canada is a big country with many competing interests,” as Jean Chretien is quoted as saying, then the status quo will always be maintained. The fact is that if the Prime Minister never really needs the West to implement his plans for the country as a whole, we are only a superfluous adjunct to the country, and our desires will never be important enough to change the system.
Can there be any words so hopelessly pointing to not changing the system as the ones Chretien is quoted as saying: "My successor will have problems, my predecessor had problems and every prime minister will have problems. It's the nature of the business."
The article goes on to state: “Recent events have highlighted that point. When the federal government shut down the cod industry Newfoundland announced it wanted to renegotiate the terms of its entry into Confederation to change jurisdiction over the fisheries.
“Toronto wants compensation for the economic losses it suffered because of SARS and cattle farmers in Alberta and other parts of Canada are looking to Ottawa for financial aid because of the outbreak of mad cow disease. Alberta Premier Ralph Klein wants the province to have greater control over the energy sector. [Editor’s note: Which region was promised aid, first? Didn’t the Western Premiers have to almost threaten the federal government before there was a promise of help for the farmers hurt by the mad cow scare? In contrast, Toronto, the centre of the Canadian universe, especially the media centre of Canada, barely had to snap it’s collective fingers.]
"There will always be tensions, it is the nature of a federation," Chretien said, "Sometimes it's one province, another province. You know it's natural in a federation where you have two levels of government.” . . .
Chretien was asked about western alienation after Paul Martin said earlier this month that if he succeeds Chretien as prime minister he would stake his legacy on eradicating it. Martin told The Vancouver Sun: "No matter what else I do as prime minister, if (the) alienation is the same as it is at the end of my term as it is now, I will not believe I have succeeded." "There is a perception that when there is a major issue, a national issue coming out of western Canada, that it often is relegated to the sidelines, whereas when there is a regional issue in central Canada it becomes a national issue," he said. [The question is, how long will Mr. Martin remember this, should he become the next Prime Minister?]
The article also mentioned that the Canada West Foundation poll released a poll last month, which showed western Canadians feel under appreciated by Canada and disadvantaged in the federation. The latest survey of 3,202 people showed that 71 per cent felt their provinces' interests were represented poorly at the national level.
In an article that highlights the injustices of Canada in one simple example that can be projected upon the whole structure and history of the country, an article by Jack Aubry, from the CanWest News Service, appearing in the Calgary Herald, entitled “Quebec rolling in Canada Day cash, Alberta gets paltry 4% of $8M budget,” of June 3, 2003, the question was asked, “Celebrate Canada? Shouldn't that be Celebrate Quebec?”
The article continues:
“That would seem to be a natural question based on the budget approved by Heritage Minister Sheila Copps last year for Celebrate Canada 2002, a federal program for events revolving around Canada Day.
“Documents obtained by the Ottawa Citizen through the Access to Information Act reveal that Quebec received more than 60 per cent of the $8.3 million Celebrate Canada budget last year, picking up $5.15 million in grants and contributions from Copps' department.
“And since the program provides funding for four events during the Canada Day period, some of the money also went toward Quebec's St-Jean-Baptiste celebrations on June 24, the province's nationalist holiday.
Meanwhile, Ontario, with more than 40 per cent of the country's population, received only about 10 per cent of the program's budget, claiming $853,900. British Columbia and Alberta fared even worse, receiving $473,700 (about six per cent) and $353,500 (about four per cent) respectively.
Canadian Heritage spokesman Len Westerberg said Quebec dominated the funding because the former Parti Quebecois government refused to fund Canada Day celebrations.
He added that some of the funding to other provinces was also used for St-Jean-Baptiste celebrations for the francophones outside of Quebec. A breakdown of this year's Celebrate Canada 2003 budget was not yet available.
The Atlantic provinces received $754,900 while, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut got $603,800.
Canada Day has always taken a backseat in Quebec to the Fete Nationale, which occurs a week earlier.
July 1 is better known as moving day with about 500,000 changes of address across the province between mid-June and mid-July.
A few years ago, when the St. Jean-Baptiste parade was rained out in Montreal, organizers refused to join Canada Day festivities.
Last year's Canada Day celebrations in Quebec City featured a group of separatists stomping on Canadian flags.
The days funded by Celebrate Canada include Canada Day, St. Jean-Baptiste Day, Canadian Multiculturalism Day (June 27) and National Aboriginal Day (June 21).
Each province forms a Celebrate Canada committee to distribute funding from the federal program.
In the budget breakdown, obtained by Ottawa researcher Ken Rubin, a footnote points out that the Quebec committee "always requests an advance of $2 million for administration and booking facilities."
The $2-million advance for Quebec is more funding than any other province receives. [end of excerpt]
By Donna Ferolie
Issue:
Alberta is a net contributor to the federal fiscal balance, with Albertans paying far more to the federal government than they get back in the form of services.
Key
Messages:
We do more than our share to ensure that Canada is strong. In 2002, Albertans paid an estimated $23.5 billion to the federal government and got back an estimated $14.5 billion in government services. That’s a difference of $9.0 billion, or $2,890 per Albertan.
The $9 billion is the difference between what Alberta pays in the form of taxes and other payments to the federal government and what Alberta gets back from the federal government in the form of services. The federal government collects its own taxes and the Alberta government does not transfer money directly to the federal government in any substantial amount.
On a per capita basis, Alberta
contributes more than any other province. In
2000, the last year for which data is available for all provinces, Alberta
contributed $2,389 per person to the federal government, compared to $2,260 for
Ontario and $673 for British Columbia. All
other provinces were net recipients.
The major transfer that the Alberta government receives
from the federal government is the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST).
Alberta does not receive Equalization payments from the federal
government. The Equalization program raises the per capita fiscal
capacity of the recipient provinces to the five province standard, that is, the
average per capita fiscal capacity of British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba,
Ontario and Quebec. All provinces except Ontario and Alberta receive
Equalization because their per capita fiscal capacity is below the standard.
Alberta has the highest fiscal capacity among provinces, followed by
Ontario and so do not receive Equalization payments.
Background:
In 2000, the last year of actual data provided by Statistics Canada, Albertans paid $20.9 billion to Ottawa (in the form of personal and corporate income taxes, indirect taxes such as gasoline taxes and the GST, and contributions to social insurance plans such as employer and employee contributions to employment insurance (EI), etc.) to fund federal programs across Canada. But, Alberta only received $13.8 billion back from the federal government (in the form of transfers, GST credits, EI, etc.) – that’s only 66 per cent of what we paid to the federal government.
Here’s what this means for individual Albertans:
In 2002, it is estimated that, on average, each Albertan paid $2,890 more to Ottawa than they got back in services.
In 2001, this number is estimated to have been $2,801.
In 2000, this number was $2,389.
Newfoundland has more courage than Alberta, it appears from the article below. Perhaps when Alberta is bankrupted to the same point, we will realize that we should have taken the same position, earlier!
DENE MOORE Canadian Press
Thursday, May 08, 2003
ST. JOHN'S, Nfld. -- The Newfoundland and Labrador government introduced a resolution Thursday calling for a renegotiation of its terms of union with Canada.
Infuriated by Ottawa's recent decision to close much of the remaining cod fishery on the East Coast, the provincial government says it wants to push for joint management of the fishing industry. Under the Constitution, the federal government has jurisdiction over the oceans.
"Again we have a made-in-Ottawa decision thrust upon us without regard and respect for the consensus of the people of this province," Premier Roger Grimes said in the legislature.
He was referring to the fact that Ottawa closed the fisheries for an indefinite period even though a federal advisory panel had recommended a small cod fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and off the northeast coast of Newfoundland.
"This situation can no longer be allowed to stand," Grimes said. "Time is running out to save our fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador."
The new resolution will direct the provincial government to seek a formal amendment to the Terms of Union, the document that formally declared Newfoundland and Labrador a province of Canada in 1949.
Aside from shared and equal management of the ocean fishery, the province also wants a constitutionally entrenched joint management board.
Newfoundland's Liberal government has been embroiled in a war of words with Ottawa since Federal Fisheries Minister Robert Thibault announced the closure two weeks ago.
The provincial government has long sought more control of its natural resources and blames the federal government for mismanaging the cod resource into collapse.
The resolution, which carries more symbolic than legal weight, is the latest attempt by the Newfoundland government to force Ottawa to change the way it treats Canada's poorest province.
But critics are sure to say Grimes's provocative move is motivated by politics.
His ruling Liberals, in power since 1989, are facing an uphill struggle in the next provincial election, which must be held before the end of the year.
Fed bashing is a time-honoured tradition among provincial politicians seeking office.
Though relations between the province and Ottawa have never been cozy, animosity between the two governments has grown since Grimes was chosen to succeed Brian Tobin as premier in 2001.
In the past two years, Grimes has routinely condemned Ottawa for ignoring the province's pleas for change.
Clearly frustrated with his lack of progress, Grimes appointed a provincial commission to investigate why the province has apparently received a raw deal since it joined Confederation.
The commission, which has heard from thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, is expected to submit its final report next month.
Grimes has repeatedly said the commission's report will not be used as a prop in a re-election drive.
"I hope this will give the province some direction that will go well beyond any one mandate, any one government, any one premier," he said in April 2002. "There are other things I could use to wrap myself in the flag if I wanted to run against Ottawa."
[end of article]
Ottawa
dismisses Nfld. call to amend Constitution
May 8 2003 (CBC)
OTTAWA-- The federal government says there's no point renegotiating Newfoundland and Labrador's union with Canada because it won't "bring back the fish."
On Thursday, the province's governing Liberals introduced a resolution in the legislature demanding the Constitution be amended.
Premier Roger Grimes said Newfoundland should be given joint control over the fishing industry. Currently, the federal government has jurisdiction over the oceans.
"Time is running out," said Grimes, who is furious over Ottawa's recent decision to virtually close the cod fishery.
But when the Canadian Alliance raised the matter during question period on Parliament Hill, Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Stephane Dion dismissed Newfoundland's proposal.
"No (constitutional) amendment would bring back the fish or do anything for the communities," Dion said in the House of Commons. "What is important is to work as good partners."
"We have no mandate from the Canadian people" to give provinces equal powers over the oceans, Dion later told reporters. "It's not in our platform, and it's not our policy."
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.
Robert Heinlein
"We must protect the right of our opponents to speak because we must hear what they have to say."
Walter Lippmann, (1889-1974)
By appreciation, we make excellence in others our own property
Voltaire. One of the greatest of all French writers and philosophers, 1694-1778
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.
Thomas Jefferson
Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.
Thomas Sowell
The First Amendment was designed to protect offensive speech, because nobody ever tries to ban the other kind.
Mike Godwin, staff counsel, Electronic Freedom Foundation
By Doug Christie
The first thing that comes to mind in consideration of the effects of this enterprise, is the question, what happened to our members? At the meeting in Medicine Hat, we were locked out of the meeting hall, since the person with the key didn’t come and open it. We met several people in the parking lot and adjourned to the Tim Horton’s where we met further people, some of whom had never heard of us before. Some people joined, but by and large this was a small and somewhat discouraging beginning to the tour. In retrospect, it was a good indication of what was to come.
As things stand with Keltie having to have surgery on June 23rd for a lumpectomy, it was clear from the beginning that I was under a lot of strain and became somewhat tired on the drive from Calgary to Medicine Hat in the first place. Somewhere west of Strathmore, I managed to fall asleep at the wheel and drive off the road. Traveling down the ditch at 110 km per hour, on cruise control is a disconcerting way to wake up. Fortunately after 200 yards, I managed to find the brake and disconnect the cruise control. After Medicine Hat, we moved to Lethbridge, and there we had a similarly small and disappointing meeting. No great enthusiasm and no one joined, however at Lethbridge, we managed to go out onto the streets with a few of our supporters, Edward Goodliffe, Travis and Trent Marshall. We gathered over 100 signatures on our petition for a Clarity Act Referendum. This was the beginning of a trend, since at each and every stop we did the same.
Our next stop was Fort MacLeod, and to our great amazement, the cattle dealers and ranchers, and auction marts were not particularly interested in our cause. It seems as if most people are waiting for the government to hand them some sort of solution. In this state of dependency, Western Canadians do not seem willing or able to fight as they were in 1980, or even earlier this very year! This attitude of submission and self-denial is typical of the slave mentality. This is something we have to overcome in Western Canada or we will be forever beholden to our masters in Ottawa, surrendering our heritage, our language and our culture, and eventually disappear into the same sea of debt.
Moving on from Lethbridge, we had a meeting at Fort MacLeod, once again being locked out of our meeting hall. A reporter from the Calgary Herald, Maria Canton, came and did a story on us. The meeting was held again in the parking lot of the church hall, and some local people attended. Some people took the books of petitions and began building the referendum option. From Fort MacLeod, the same results occurred in Pincher Creek, a small and somewhat disappointing turnout at the public meeting, but overwhelming support for the petitions on the street. In Cardston, we had a very disappointing meeting as well, with again a small turnout but large numbers of signatures on the petition. Moving north to Cochrane the next day, we had a good meeting, with a few people from Cochrane in attendance, and many more signatures in the parking lots of the shopping malls and other places where we attended. Calgary again to our great surprise, was a very small public meeting. On each day from the beginning to Calgary, and with the help of Edward, Travis, Trent and our friends, we got approximately 200 signatures a day. After Calgary, I had to return home to help take care of our family in view of Keltie’s health and the need to get ready for whatever may come. Robert Kratchmer carried on with the tour to Brooks, Drumheller, Stettler, Red Deer, Rocky Mountain House, Camrose and then Wetaskiwin. I have yet to hear exactly what happened in the latter days of the tour, but if I can derive some experience from it, it would be as follows:
Summer tours are a difficult time to approach people.
If the members of our movement don’t seek to help us when we really need it and when we call on our help, this movement cannot and will not grow.
There is no other organization doing more for Western Canada’s referendum option.
There is no other clear alternative and no other legal means to attain our goal, than a referendum petition in each province, beginning with the most likely candidate, Alberta.
If you and each of you who read this newsletter, want to see us succeed, you’re going to have to help us with donations, because everything we did cost money, and that money was spent for the halls, the gas, the other activities along the way. None of us are rich and we need every one of us to help pay the costs of this activity. Even at the end of that process, it’s got to be made known that if individual initiative won’t change the course of history, nothing will, and you and I owe it to ourselves, to our ancestors and to our descendents to do everything in our power to make independence for Western Canada possible. The alternative, a Liberal government forever, untrammeled immigration that will drown us, taxation that will destroy us, the elimination of freedom that will rob us of freedom of speech and of property rights as a few examples, is everywhere around us, will leave us with a perpetual bitter taste in our mouths and we cannot live in an atmosphere of eternal frustration. Western Canada must be our goal and if we are to attain it, it will require more sacrifice.
The alternative to this is to do nothing, and watch as more farmers go to jail, as the Kyoto Accord strangles more of our wealth and takes our resources to the government in Ottawa, as more and more gun regulation and other frivolous intrusions on freedom occur, as more and more bilingualism is a criterion for advancement in the judiciary, civil service, and the military, as more and more taxation and control increase, as more and more Canadian Human Rights Tribunals silence freedom of speech, as Liberals remain in power and appoint their friends to positions of power for longer periods of time. Those alternatives are intolerable to those of us who believe in freedom and therefore we will carry on, one way or another.
In order to perpetuate and carry on our message, we will have a CD available soon of the meetings on the tour and this will be available for a cost of about $10, and this will give us the means to communicate with people who might be sympathetic who might not come to a meeting. The speeches of the various people who came on the tour, are truly inspirational and deserve to be memorialized and given a wider audience. We hope you will join with us in carrying on in the cause of Western Canada, through the province of Alberta first, and the other provinces of Western Canada as soon as possible.