Volume XV, Numbers 10, October 1997
The Western Separatist Papers are published
monthly by W.S.P. Ltd.
Address all correspondence to WSP, P.O. Box 40143, Victoria, B.C.
Western Canada V8W 3N3.
A one-year subscription is $15.00. Our e-mail address is:
wcc@ftcnet.com
Our Cover: The caption to this cartoon which appeared in the July 26th, 1916 Grain Grower's Guide, read "The farmer produces most. The manufacturer profits most," and focused attention on the tariff, freight rates and political influence of eastern manufacturers, which were all considered to be a constant threat to the West.
To the Editor:
My initial reaction to the article by Douglas Christie in the September WSP demonstrates something that is true of most Western Canadians, that however much we profess to be Westerners first, it is in practice very hard to change one's thinking from taking ideological positions on issues from a left-right perspective, to thinking "West first."
It was quite annoying to consider supporting Glen Clark for any reason, however then I compared him to David Anderson and I knew right away which I'd prefer. Similarly with all the hurrahs for Pat Carney, in her recent stand for B.C. I remember when she was a federal politician, and she did ride that gravy train right into the Senate, no matter how popularly she was supported at home.
It appears that until we have general recognition of the leaders like Doug Christie who have never even paid lip service to federalism, we must support those from the West who have gone to Ottawa and returned newly born into an awareness of their roots. Now if only this would happen (publicly) to the Reformers!
J.R. Lee
Kamloops, BC
I would like to offer my sincere best wishes and prayer for you and your cause. Many of us here in the USA realize that our central government is THE source for most of our problems. They steal our money through punitive taxes, stir-up racial hatreds, and have in essence confiscated much of our private property through excessive regulation. Once again, I sincerely wish the best for you. If you have an email mailing list, please include me.
For liberty, Bill Tucker
St. Louis, Missouri
The Western Separatist Papers welcomes your letters to the editor. They should pertain to Western Canadian issues, and be short, due to our space limitations. Please send them to the Editor, WSP, P.O. Box 40143, Victoria, B.C. V8W 3N3, or by e-mail to wcc@ftcnet.com .
The end of September saw the idea of western independence in prominence with the comments of Senator Pat Carney that British Columbia should renegotiate its relationship with Canada and not rule out separation. Ms. Carney told the Vancouver Sun she "just doesn't know any more" what to tell British Columbians questioning federal policies. After years of fighting to have the federal government address fishing issues and other B.C. concerns, Ms. Carney said she's ready to give up.
"I just don't see what we can do," she said. "The lesson of the salmon wars is that B.C. does not count. That's a fact. I think we have to rethink what we want from Confederation because the current arrangement is not meeting our needs and the fish war proves that."
From the destaffing of lighthouses and Coast Guard cuts, to a lack of job training for displaced fishermen, Ms. Carney said every B.C. priority is ignored. "It's the central Canadian ethic that's being imposed on us in all strata, all levels of Canadian society. I guess I just realized that these issues don't matter," she lamented.
"They don't matter in Parliament. And this has driven me to thinking that playing by the rules is not going to get their attention"
"We just don't have enough representation and I don't know what to tell people any more," she said. "I'm thinking we have to renegotiate another relationship with Canada ourselves. Here they are in Ottawa talking about the fiscal dividend and the surplus and everything else like that and they are categorically denying British Columbia, across the board, all its priorities. They displaced half the fishing fleet, displaced thousands of workers and then they sit in Ottawa and talk about doing youth employment projects. I don't know."
Ms. Carney said this is the lowest her faith in Canada has been.
"When you negotiate you don't take anything off the table. . . . Quebec doesn't and British Columbia shouldn't," she said from her West Coast home. "I'm suggesting we renegotiate in the same way Quebec is talking about it."
"The lesson of the salmon war is that British Columbia does have to rethink its relationship with Central Canada," Ms. Carney said. "If they can write off coastal communities and up to 7,000 workers, if they can write off coastal communities and the people who live there, who are they going to write off next? That is what I feel so bitter about."
Carney said she hoped Premier Clark's promised consultation process on constitutional discussions would prompt the public into rethinking B.C.'s place in Canada.
Carney said her office has been flooded with calls of support from British Columbians.
"I just feel this doesn't represent the views of British Columbians," said Fisheries Minister David Anderson, the province's senior cabinet member. "I'm disappointed. She appears somewhat bitter."
University of B.C. political professor Paul Tennent said the idea of B.C. separation has been around since 1871, when the province joined Confederation. But at no time - even now - has it received serious discussion or widespread support. "If it were serious you'd start hearing political groups advocating it. But virtually nobody is taking about this," he said. "There are just no signs, there just isn't any fear out there."
B.C.'s Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Andrew Petter doesn't sense any support for B.C. separation either, saying the notion is negative for Canadian unity. Even though British Columbia has important grievances and frustrations with Ottawa, Petter said they can be fought out within Canada without the threat of separation.
While Reform Leader Preston Manning doesn't support the notion of B.C. separation, he said Carney is reflecting the frustrations felt by British Columbians.
Other Reformers were even more critical. MP John Reynolds said Carney should have been asked to give up her Conservative status and sit as an Independent. And Carney's riding MP, Reformer Gary Lunn, said she should consider giving up her Senate seat and paycheque.
Meanwhile, October 6, 1997, the following article by Michael Jenkinson, appeared in the Edmonton Sun, and is quoted in full.
My, my. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose, as we say out in these parts. Here we all thought that after ditching the Bloc Quebecois as official Opposition, we were through with separatist opposition parties.
Yet, here's the Reform party playing up the prospects of B.C. separation.
Or at least, that's what Reform was accused of after the party seized upon Tory Senator Pat Carney's observation that B.C. should look at renegotiating its partnership with Canada and keep open all options, including separation.
Last Monday in Question Period, B.C. Reformer Val Meredith noted that 70% of respondents to a Vancouver newspaper survey said they backed Carney's comments. She asked whether the government has been insensitive to British Columbians.
The Grits usually treated the Bloc with kid gloves. But this time, Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Stephane Dion started ranting as if his lithium had just worn off.
"Quebec and British Columbia, yes, yes and yes," hollered Dion, doing his best impression of Meg Ryan in When Harry Met Sally. He then started flailing his arms about as if it was Joe Cocker Karaoke Night on the Hill. "Secession, no, no, and no!"
The former academic then calmed down long enough to go into a scrum, where a brave reporter resurrected the famous quote from Dion's late father, Leon, the Quebec constitutional expert who once said that the only way Quebec can get a better deal is to hold a knife to Canada's throat. Why shouldn't B.C. do the same, Dion was asked?
No orgasmic rapture this time. Dion the Younger glared, turned and left the scrum. Always a pity when the sins of the father are visited on the son. Especially when the father's sin was stating the obvious.
I confess to being torn about all this. On the one hand, it would be childish and hypocritical for B.C., or Alberta, to begin threatening separation given all the complaining we've done for decades about how Quebec separatists keep screwing up the country.
Yet Ottawa has demonstrated for 30 years that the knife-to-the-throat game works, and sometimes I wonder why it has taken westerners so long to figure this out. We western folks must have the patience of Job to continue to believe in Canada when Ottawa has kowtowed to Quebec while rewarding Alberta with such niceties as the National Energy Program.
Given our history, I'm always amazed that the West's chosen vehicle of political protest is a party that wants to keep Canada together, albeit on our terms, not Ottawa's. Indeed, despite the presence of at least two ex-western separatists in the party, Reform is not threatening western separation if its plans to reform the federation fail.
At least, not yet. I've always thought that if you scratch a Reformer, you'll find a western separatist. They'll deny it, and honestly, too.
I suspect, though, that most Reform MPs have not considered the possibility that the party may not succeed in its attempts to reform the nation. Or more accurately, that Reform's attempts at reforming Canada will be thwarted by a recalcitrant federal government and a spoiled Quebec.
Reform is the West's last, best shot at getting Canada operating as if we're a part of the late 20th century, not the mid-18th. But if the Liberals continue with this silly double standard of only recognizing Quebec's grievances as legitimate while ignoring those out west, slowly but surely western alienation expressed through Reform will turn to separatist sentiment expressed through Reform.
And then some future Liberal intergovernmental affairs minister will have the same deja vu as Dion. Plus ca change ...
In battle those who are most afraid are always in most danger.
Catiline: Address to his army in the field near Pistoria, 63 B.C.
It is better to be on hand with ten men than to be absent with ten thousand.
Ascribed to Tamerlane (1336-1405)
The battle is not to the strong alone; it is to vigilant, the active, the brave.
Patrick Henry: Speech in the Virginia Convention, March 23, 1775
Where wisdom is called for, force is of little use.
Herodotus: Histories III, c 430 BC
Who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe.
John Milton, Paradise Lost, 1667
Force cannot give right.
Thomas Jefferson: The Rights of British America, 1774
Who can be secure of private right,
If sovereign sway may be dissolved by might?
Nor is the people's judgment always true:
The more may err as grossly as the few.
John Dryden: Absalom and Achitophel, 1682
When the people have no other tyrant, their own public opinion becomes one.
E.G. Bulwer-Lytton: Ernest Maltravers, 1837
Public opinion is a compound of folly, weakness, prejudice, wrong feeling, right feeling, obstinacy, and newspaper paragraphs.
Robert Peel (1788-1850)
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.
Thomas Jefferson: Letter to Mrs. John Adams, 1787
by William Thorsell, Globe & Mail, September 27, 1997, page D9
On September 20, 1997 Mr. Thorsell addressed the Vancouver Institute and those remarks were later published in the "Nation's Newspaper." They contain analysis the like of which has been spoken in the small country halls throughout Western Canada during the heyday of Western Canada Concept, and reflect an awareness of the state of Canada that resides in any Western Canadian that has addressed the issue of what's wrong with Canada. Mr. Thorsell's marshaling of the facts, especially his presentation of the power of the Canadian Prime Minister should be learned by every Canadian. Some excerpts follow:
"While power in the media is dissipating, political power remains highly centralized in Canada, especially at the federal level. Overcentralization has many roots. Here are just four:
"Our first past the post electoral system squelches minority views. Rarely does the composition of Parliament come close to reflecting the actual voting preferences of the population. This is especially true for smaller political parties, or for parties whose support is more thinly spread across many constituencies. (As a recent example, the federal Conservatives got more votes nationally than the Bloc Quebecois or Reform party in 1993, but won only two seats, compared with the Bloc's 54 and Reform's 52.)
"Our voting system can even give a party that came in second in the popular vote a majority of seats in a legislature — to whit, the current B.C. government. Most consistently, our electoral system oppresses smaller minority parties (such as the New Democrats or former National Party), and gives the lottery win to bigger minority parties that then enjoy enormous scope to govern. Canada's voting rules are heavily skewed to the status quo.
"The distribution of population in Canada greatly exacerbates the arbitrary effects of the electoral system. Fully one-third of Canada's population lives in Ontario, and another 25 per cent in Quebec. With over half the population in two of 12 jurisdictions, the majority in the House of Commons is invariably determined by Central Canada. A geographic over-centralization of power, based on the skewed distribution of our population, consistently marginalizes regions, just as the electoral system does political minorities.
"This is true even when provinces such as Alberta and British Columbia are well-represented within governing parties. The majority of the caucus in such cases still rests in Central Canada, and regional voices must often defer to them as well.
"Power is also highly centralized within Parliament itself. There is no effective upper house to bring regional balance to simple representation by population in the House of Commons. Our Senate has almost equal constitution power with the Commons, but the Senate is both unelected and still heavily weighted in it composition toward the two central provinces. The contrast with the United States is stark and often drawn, but we have failed completely in our efforts to reform the Senate as a workable, sensible counterweight to the over-concentration of power based on geography.
"There is one final arena of power-playing in which the prime minister plays an enormously decisive and almost unfettered role: the power to appoint people to major positions outside the government. There are some 255 boards and commissions whose membership is a prime-ministerial prerogative. The most provocative of these are:
"The Governor-General, effectively the Canadian head of state, who may sometimes intervene over the will of a Prime Minister in parliamentary affairs. The last three prime ministers have appointed former members of their own cabinets to this post.
"The prime minister also appoints each of the lieutenant-governors of the 10 provinces.
"The nine justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, who sit in judgment of the government of Canada in constitutional matters, including the division of powers with the provinces and the constitutionality of federal laws under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
"The Senate, the upper house in Parliament, which technically has equal power to the Commons and can initiate any legislation except money bills.
"It is astonishing that the Prime Minister has the personal power to select what specific individuals will act as his check and balance in Rideau Hall, the Supreme Court and the Senate, without even public hearings to vet his choices.
"The Prime Minister also appoints judges to the Federal Court of Canada and the high courts of all the provinces. He appoints the Governor of the Bank of Canada and all Canadian Human Rights Commissions, the privacy Commissioner and the Freedom of Information Commissioner. He appoints the Parliamentary Ethics Commissioner — who reports directly back to the Prime Minister, rather than to Parliament.
"The PM appoints the heads of the Canadian Forces, both the chair and president of the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., the chair and board of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (which licenses the electronic media), the head of the Canada Council, the National Film Board and all major federal cultural agencies. He appoints the members of the Immigration and Refugee Appeal Board, the Auditor-General of Canada (who is meant to assess the value of money spent by the government), all our ambassadors to foreign countries and international organizations (such as the United Nations and International Monetary Fund), the Employment Insurance Commission, the boards of the regional-development agencies, the Competition Tribunal, the Canada Labour Relations Board, the boards of Petro-Canada, the National Parole Board, a plethora of other regional boards and commissions such as the Canadian Broiler Hatching Egg Marketing Agency) and, of course, the head of the RCMP and the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada.
"None of these appointments requires the review of approval of any elected representatives.
"Not only does the Prime Minister determine the composition of all these national institutions, and not only are all his appointees directly beholden to him for their appointments, but this vast unregulated power of appointment gives the PM enormous sway over legions of people hoping for appointments in the future. It is nepotism writ as large as in any banana republic. The systemic over-concentration of power reaches its zenith and terrible, logical conclusion in the astounding list of functions beyond the Commons itself that are subject to the Prime Minister's personal choice.
"None of this has changed over the years, despite occasional attempts at reform...
"Power is never given up; it is always taken away. . . .
"Let the citizens beware of their own tolerance for autocracy."
"A Sell-out"
Confederation was a sell-out of Nova Scotia, cried Joseph Howe, the most eloquent voice in the Maritimes.
In the following letter, written to a Montreal colleague just two months before Canada was born, Mr. Howe flails representatives of both political parties for their role in bringing on a union of the Atlantic provinces with the two Canadas. Unfortunately, Mr. Howe, like other equally outspoken opponents of the union such as John Sandfield Macdonald, the first premier of Ontario, was later to lend his full support in attempting to make Confederation work.
Halifax, May 11th, 1867
My dear Young:
Thanks for your note and for the slips which I read with much interest. I do not pretend to understand all the improvements you suggest but you think more about these things than other people and are generally right.
It would be a gross breach of faith not to complete the intercolonial railroad.
What you say about the reformers I do not clearly apprehend. Both parties in Canada have treated us with equal barbarity and oppression, trampling upon our franchises and dragging us into this confederacy without our consent . . We must submit of course because we cannot fight the British Government but if the Queen's troops were withdrawn I would die upon the frontier rather than submit to such an outrage.
Our first duty will be to punish the rascals here who have betrayed and sold us. If then convinced that Canadians are disposed to act fairly we may try the experiment and endeavour to work the new system. . . .
Believe me, Truly yours,
Joseph Howe
by Douglas Christie
One wonders why Canadians bother to keep trying to placate Quebec. Don't they know that appeasement never works?
The Meech Lake Accord offered them special status. It wasn't enough. The Charlottetown Accord offered them special status. For them, it was still not enough. For the rest of us, it was too much. We said so in a clear referendum result.
Then the Reform party who have stood up to Quebec for awhile caved in and endorsed the "Calgary Accord" which recognized Quebec not as distinct but "unique." Surely this too is not enough as far as Quebecers are concerned. It is the Canadian solution — say something ambiguous which is a lie to both sides. Then interpret it differently in different camps and from time to time, as circumstances warrant.
But then, Preston Manning, the master of confusion says this does not mean special status for Quebec. Not being a Liberal he doesn't know when to tell the appropriate lie to the appropriate people. He is so naive as to tell 30 Quebec academics and business leaders at the Institute for Public Policy Research in Montreal on Friday October 24th that he believed in the equality of provinces. That is why they will always vote Liberal, federally, and separatist provincially.
Quebec must have rights they feel which are equal to all the other nine provinces (combined). Their view of equality is for Quebec to get 50% of the goodies and the rest of Canada to share 50% of the rest!
This view has been catered to by the liberal mafia elite, the bureaucratic thieves who run Ottawa.
Anyone who knows Canada's true operations and methods realizes that Preston Manning's wasting time and being foolish. It is very unlikely he will ever achieve government. Those who know how Ottawa works have seen that CSIS really are the "political police" and targeted the Reform Party when the constituted a real threat. That threat only existed when Brian Mulroney was being used to impose the GST and the "bait and switch" to the Liberals was being sprung on the Canadian people. At such vulnerable times the Liberal/Conservative elite fear possible breakdown of power. So on that occasion they used a CSIS operative Grant Bristow to link a government-created organization called the Heritage Front to smear the Reform Party as "extreme right wing." That's all it took to put Reform in second place in Ontario, the only place that counted. Reform won only one seat in Ontario which it has since lost to the Liberals.
Now Preston Manning has just about done his job. He has given Western Canadians about 10 years of false hope. They have been deluded by him into thinking Canada can be reformed. All the while, Ottawa is plundering Western resources, controlling our culture, flooding us with immigration to divide us and increasing our debt (albeit at a slower rate) whittling our services from government, downloading federal expenditures, closing our lighthouses and allowing US fishermen to steal our fish. Those who had the means to stop this, to achieve a new nation for us in the West, and did nothing, to preserve our land and heritage, will be properly viewed as traitors to their people in future.
This land, which consists of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba could become, would be a prosperous, debt-free, English-speaking nation where our European Christian heritage could thrive, if we are able soon to achieve our independence. The alternative if we do not, is to become a country far different than we are where European Christian English-speaking culture is a thing of the past and our land overrun by alien cultural ghettoes always at conflict, never assimilated. We stand at the crossroads of destiny. Mr. Manning and his Ottawa based cronies beckon us to lie down and go back to sleep. For them the problem doesn't exist.
I was asked in September to speak to a group of international investors from many different countries, who are basically libertarians, at an offshore location. Their focus is the bankrupt nation-state, the theft of private property in the form of taxes and the means of escaping this legalized theft by offshore investment.
My message was simple: assuming for the moment that escaping the high taxation theft and moving assets offshore by legal means is possible, what then? You will have abandoned your country for a residence abroad and have to confront the growing threat to your freedom by others, detached of your roots and adrift in an international sea of conflicting values, culture and devoid of loyalties. It is not surprising the degree to which taxation has driven the productive members of society to feel cutoff in their allegiance to the nations which have basically enslaved them. But is the answer to give up on those nations?
Thus I reasoned, it was essential to stay and fight in the political arena for the nation you want rather than flee to others that "ye know naught of." The essential value of a nation is in its respect for the property of its citizens, their beings and that which they create with who and what they are. Freedom, property and culture are all being lost by default as those with initiative, resources and ability are escaping from the struggle. It is a difficult decision to make, not to dessert and leave more for those of us who believe in freedom to do without support.
My speech advocated smaller states, closer to the people governed, for lower taxation, for smaller bureaucracies. It was essentially what I have struggled for during the last twenty years.
The speech was surprisingly well-received. Most of the investors said they wanted to withdraw their support from a bankrupt system so they could return later and rebuild with the means to do so. It is meetings like this which take place on the high seas, where more truth is told than can be said at present in any nation state. There is awareness of a grim reality spreading and it resembles the fear of a police state, something which Canada is quickly becoming.
As states become bankrupt, they raise taxes. As they raise taxes they put in place military and police powers to eliminate resistance by an unruly populace. They outlaw guns. They also increase powers of surveillance and intrusion to prevent escape and create more penal tax laws. They then outlaw even freedom to speak out in protest. Have you not noticed any of these features in Canada of late? It is too easy to run and leave the rest of us to our fate. Western Canada could do better.
Incidentally, if you are interested in a series of tapes by Investors International about this whole subject, please contact me and I will give you more information (phone 250-385-1022 or fax 250-479-3294, or write: 810 Courtney Street, Victoria, BC V8W 1C4).
My impression of Dr. Van Lin who is the head of this organization is of a highly intelligent, principled defender of freedom. He speaks on several tapes which I have heard, of the dangers of the socialist system which has destroyed people the world over. He is a devotee of Thomas Paine and closed his speech with his immortal words "give me liberty or give me death." There is a great deal to learn from men like him. I hope to have more to say about Dr. Van Lin in the future.