Quebec’s secession from Canada has been driven by many factors such as the provinces’s belief in a distinct identity, lack of representation in politics and the isolation of Quebec’s culture and language from the rest of Canada. These beliefs are valid but, realistically a secession from Canada will cause economic destruction within the province. It has been reported that the province of Quebec has little economic backing in trade to finance a legitimate government in international politics. Also, issues concerning international trade and negotiations will become difficult to deal with as economic stability will not be immediately guaranteed. In addition to that, all the chaos from these problems will inevitably lead to Quebec’s citizens
With many losses to secure a stronghold in the provincial Congress the Patriot cause has been at a disadvantage. The Second Session of the Provincial Congress the petition to re-open the courts passed however it is under British rule. The very first act to not be in favor or help the patriot cause. Opening the courts under British rule will make passing laws and creating a new system more difficult. Americans wanting freedom from the British rule must take even more dangerous actions by way of mobs and a large amount of sacrifice the possibility of sending our men and sons to war to enable the Patriots a victory over his Majesty’s tyrannical ways.
In 1965 Lester Pearson presented Canada 's new flag, in light of the fact that the Red Ensign was excessively British, making it impossible to be the image of advanced Canada. Numerous residents opposed for having another banner both for reasons of tradition and they were persuaded that Pearson was pressured into it and didn 't really need another banner. English Canadians needed to keep the Red Ensign yet on February 15, 1965, when Canada 's new banner was raised on Parliament Hill surprisingly, all that they were loaded with, was pride and affection. Pearson and the French Canadian needed another banner yet Diefenbaker and the Conservatives needed to keep the Red Ensign to demonstrate a tiny bit of British representation. So the Liberals
They’re a lot of farmers from the putrid South trying to make us enter Canada. The risk of raising tensions between the British and causing another war isn’t worth it. Also, they said that the British were supplying the Natives with weapons. We all know that the Natives are quite ludicrous, they’ll fall to our might once
Although tragic, Canada 's war effort won a separate signature on the Peace Treaty. This gave Canada the constantly wanted national status, it gave to Canadians nationhood. Although proud of their autonomy, Canada 's economic situation was terrible. Before the war, Canada 's debt was already rising, because of the loss in wheat crops and the loss of jobs due to the railway. After the war ended, Canada 's economy did not get better.
Both Alexander Mackenzie and John A. Macdonald contributed greatly to making Canada what it is today. However, due to being on opposing political parties, they both came up with completely opposite policies. First of all, while Mackenzie was seeking free trade with the USA, Macdonald implemented the National Policy. In addition, both Mackenzie and Macdonald had different intentions towards the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) project. Macdonald wanted to complete the CPR project, however, Mackenzie gave it no thought and immediately cancelled it.
The Anti-Federalists that opposed the constitution believed that the constitution would give too much power to the government. The Anti-Federalists argued that a powerful government would become tyrannical like the British monarchy that they worked so hard to escape from. This led them to create The Bill of Rights. Today’s government has similar problems. Nowadays some politicians believe that The Bill of Rights is a living document that can be changed or manipulated to “better fit” the era that we live in.
In terms of indigenous nations taking part in constituting a political community with the rest of Canada, the land issue is one of the most prominent issues in which the colonizers exploited leading to continuous tensions with the federal government and the fragility in Canada’s political community. For indigenous nations, colonization deprived them of the relationship with their land in which indigenous identities are defined along (Hudson & MacDonald, 2012, p. 429). Although indigenous people and the British had treaty-like agreements, much of those treaties were ignored and the indigenous land was taken without the consent of the indigenous nations. An example of a treaty that was ignored by the colonizers is the Royal Proclamation of 1763
The Queen, the POGG provision was applied solely because Canadian survival was at risk. This proves that the rules were so vague and ever-changing over the application of POGG powers that even the Supreme Court of Canada and JCPC disagree on the usage and interpretation. When both branches of the judiciary cannot come to an agreement about a power that is expansive and impactful as POGG, it only makes the case stronger for abolition of the POGG clause. Instead the judicial branch continued to enforce laws through the perspective of 1867 onto the Canadian
When he offered to pay for the trip and still was turned down, he knew his position was untenable” (Macleod, 2005). French had tried to bring change to the leaders of Canada but was denied, even if did not succeed in changing the government’s position, French showed the characteristics of a transformational leader by identifying the Northwest Mounted Police were achieving setting up a policing force in western Canada and needed to be allowed to continue
In the articles “Romanticism and realism in Canada’s foreign policy” by Allan Gotlieb, and “Canada’s global promise” by Jennifer Welsh, both authors argue the need for Canada to re-evaluate their current foreign policy however, differ in the way of how Canada should strive for international growth. Firstly, both authors contend that due to Canada’s lack of involvement of being the “peacekeeper” that they use to be, Canada’s reputation of being the global player has taken a serious hit. In Welsh’s article she mentions many Canadians want to be more active on the world stage, and want to spend more money on over seas development, and such UN projects, however the problem “is that Canadians are rarely asked to make difficult trade-offs in spending”. As a result, the Canadian government has to make cuts in spending on such military resources, and programs, in
It is the right time to prepare the military of US to invade Canada and win drastically. We can’t let our people suffer because of Canada. Before Canada attacks the US, why not attack Canada. All that is happening with the death of David Rockefeller and obviously with the Trump 's pro-USA policies which strongly insisted the plan to be executed like this. With the Trump’s policies, several countries have been restricted access to the state like Iraq, Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan.
The conclusion by the committee fails because of the many assumptions that it fails to back with data. Because the conclusion fails to account for assumptions regarding the evidence of reduced education budget, the increased adult population, or the reduced influx of students it fails to make a cohesive case and fails under close scrutiny. The argument assumes that because of the dwindling population birthrate, the education funds can be cut for the next decade. While the trends might indicate that the population has reduced in the past 5 years, it is not a foregone conclusion that it would continue to do so. If the population of the Calatrava increased in the near future, the funds allocated towards the future education of the students might hugely fall of the mark.
The conclusion of production left many of Canadians to fend for themselves, while the United States thrived with technology and innovation. In my opinion, it would be eye-opening for the Canadians to see their masterpeice not being able to soar in Canada, as it would somewhere else. It is eye-opening for Canada 's political and economic state to see them coming so far as a country, in an innovation that could have greatly surpassed anything in its time, not be possible. This was a realization that it is difficult for a "country the size of Canada to compete in the business of building costly weapons of war." And even to this day, it is hard for Canadians not to blame the United States for the destruction of the Arrow.