In which Ed Hollett is contradicted
The ever-astute Bond Papers gets it slightly wrong today:
When all else fails declare war on the evil occupying government called Ottawa."When all else fails..."?
How can we possibly know if all else, or even anything else, has failed, when absolutely nothing else has ever been tried?
posted by WJM @ 10:38 PM
7 Comments:
But Wally - He's doubly wrong. "Occupying" would require a presence. And you know what the emperor says about the "presence".
It's interesting to not that on matters of fisheries, for instance, successive provincial governments offered to end the ability of the province to ever again blame Ottawa. The province wanted to step up and take some responsibility. They were rebuffed. Rebuffed with the greatest amount of patronizing imaginable. Odd reaction . . . Maybe some guys in Ottawa like those declarations of war as much or more than the grit and tory denizens of the Confederation building . . .
It's interesting to not that on matters of fisheries, for instance, successive provincial governments offered to end the ability of the province to ever again blame Ottawa.
They said they wanted it. Makes great rhetoric.
But as Chairman Dan's inaction on the file shows, they don't actually want it. Not until they can find some way of (a) calling all the shots while (b) Ottawa pays all the bills and takes all the blame.
Hey WJM, how about your stand? When all else fails blame the evil occupying government in Newfoundland.
Hey WJM, how about your stand? When all else fails blame the evil occupying government in Newfoundland.
At least I wait till all else to fail! (And I don't think they're evil...)
Wally said:
"They said they wanted it. Makes great rhetoric."
Obviously - in the past - the feds wanted it too. Otherwise, they'd have no probelm with the request/demand and would have entered negotiations. Call it whatever you want. If you think province was ever bluffing, call it a call on its bluff.
But no, past governments of Canada very definitely and under governments of different stripes, made it pretty clear that it wouldn't matter if every single NLer voted in a referendum for J.M., it wouldn't go on the table . . . even when the MPs from the province have supported it too . .
Now, we have a governing party in Ottawa that, at least in its written policy, claims to support J.M. . . and for the first time in decades a provincial government that won't pursue it.
You're right that it has not been a priority for the current provincial government -- and based on the conversations I had with Trev Taylor in 2005, you're right that they want someone else paying the shot. I disagreed and still disagree with Trev on this point. We should pay our way in a fair way if we want equal say.
If you think province was ever bluffing, call it a call on its bluff.
Done.
you're right that they want someone else paying the shot.
Not just that. They want le fédéral to still have jurisdiction for costs AND FOR TAKING THE BLAME.
Doling out quotas, allocations, licenses, and wharves, of course, brought it into Confederation etc.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home