babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » from far and wide   » nunavut, nwt, yukon   » Should We Scrap The Territories?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Should We Scrap The Territories?
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 27 November 2005 08:30 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Should we grant full provincial status to Nunavut, Yukon, and the Nortwest Territoires? I often hear about meetings and such with "the provinces" where the Territories are excluded. Would such a move provide the Territories with more autonomy for making local decisions? What would the drawbacks be from such a move?
From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
tallyho
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10917

posted 27 November 2005 08:35 PM      Profile for tallyho        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Being a province also brings responsibility. Would they be able to run their own health care, education, etc.? Raise revenue for these through provincial taxes?

At a national level, Quebec might be even less thrilled by one province in 13 rather than one in 10 unless constitutional changing formulas, the senate, etc. was kept weighted in their favour.


From: The NDP sells out Alberta workers | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 27 November 2005 08:45 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I understand that the self-determination wishes of Nunavut basically consists of becoming a province and that they are working towards gaining the credibility to do so. There's also been a long dialogue (since at least the 1960's) about turning the western Artic (current Northwest Territories) into a new province, Denedeh, that would include self-government for the Dene nation. However, the Dene have been less willing to sacrifice certain demands on resources than the Inuit. The Nunavut deal led to a large amount of traditionally shared territory being included in Nunavut rather than in Denedeh. Also, a lot of the traditional Dene territory is in the northern parts of the provinces, making this difficult. (The community in which I grew up in the Peace Country is in traditional Dene territory, although the Woodland Cree expanded into that area during the 1800's as well. A look at the map shows that this is well into Alberta.) The development of diamond resources has empowered many Dene nations; they've learned quite a few lessons from when oil was exploited in a way that largely excluded them. But, the diamond developments also mean that the federal government will be all the more eager to keep it's fingers in the pot.

As for the Yukon, I think granting provincial status there would be dependent upon settling treaties with a number of nations who, as in BC, never were included in numbered treaties. It's for those reasons that I don't see either the Northwest Territories or the Yukon becoming provinces anytime soon, or ever with their current boundaries.

Nunavut, OTOH, I think will succeed in becoming a province in a few decades.


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
tallyho
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10917

posted 27 November 2005 08:53 PM      Profile for tallyho        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Kurichina, is there anything in the government of the territories that guarantees native participation? It wouldn't take much of a population shift to the north ( oil discoveries, a pipeline, etc.) to change the demographics and balance of power. This might be a non-issue but I wonder how statehood impacted the natives of Alaska or Hawaii.
From: The NDP sells out Alberta workers | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 27 November 2005 09:06 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
For Nunavut, yes. I'm not sufficiently up-to-date to go into great detail, but this link on the agreement refers to equal representation between Inuit and (federal) government on resource management boards, for e.g.

But, I'm less certain for the Northwest territories and the Yukon. But again, as we're just beginning to appreciate in BC, untreatied land is illegitimate under the Royal Proclamation. All the provinces except BC, Quebec and Newfoundland (Labrador) had complete treaty coverage when they were created, even if those treaties have not been respected through the years. IANAL, but I don't think a demographic shift would affect that at this point because it's legal doctrine, stemming from the Delgamuukw decision. Babble lawyers might be able to correct/explain this better, though.

The Dene nation has struggled long and hard for control over their sovereign resources. They are very organized. Therefore, I can't see any demographic shift that would be sufficiently powerful to overcome that. And that's a good thing.


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ken Burch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8346

posted 28 November 2005 12:02 AM      Profile for Ken Burch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If the territories received provincial status, and the old "triple E" Senate proposal were adopted, would anyone be left in Nunavut after the Senate appointments were made?
From: A seedy truckstop on the Information Superhighway | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
pebbles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6400

posted 28 November 2005 01:02 AM      Profile for pebbles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
At the very least, the three territories should directly collect any resource revenues from resource projects within their borders.
From: Canada | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 28 November 2005 03:39 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oops. I could have swore it said, "Should we scrap the tories?." My bad. Carry on.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
tallyho
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10917

posted 28 November 2005 03:44 PM      Profile for tallyho        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Cripes, fidel. You made me laugh so hard I had tea coming out my nose!

Is there a prize for best line of the week? If so, claim it.


From: The NDP sells out Alberta workers | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 29 November 2005 08:17 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hmm, NWT looks pretty big. I think it would win a scrap.

That being said, any suggestions that the territories lack the tax base to provide for their population should be referred to PEI.

The population is a lot more spread out, but the resource base is gigantic. WIth the right supports in the beginning, I'm sure the territories would do just fine.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 11 December 2005 02:17 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
My grandfather believed that Canada should be reorganized into geopolitical regions: Maritimes, Quebec, Ontario, the Prairies, & BC. He saw no purpose of having four distinct Maritime Provinces or three Prairie Provinces. By combining into larger regions, there would be better balance than we have endured with the Upper Canada/Lower Canada duality.

I don't recall my grandfather ever discussing the fate of the northern Territories, but I'm sure that he would have favoured more involvement, not less.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 11 December 2005 02:19 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cougyr:
He saw no purpose of having four distinct Maritime Provinces or three Prairie Provinces.

Newfoundland and Labrador is not a Maritime province.

While the four Atlantic provinces are small in population, they are distinct from each other. Geography doesn't mean similarity.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 12 December 2005 02:05 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'd much prefer to see several of the existing larger provinces split in half along an East-West line.

Edmonton the capital of Alberta North. Prince George the capital of Northern BC & Yukon. Saskatoon the capital of North Saskatchewan. That sort of thing.

Never happen in Alberta though - the Calgary oil barons would be apoplectic.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Yukoner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5787

posted 12 December 2005 03:14 PM      Profile for Yukoner   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Yukon already devolved in 2003 and we have more 'provincial like' powers than the other 2 territories but they are headed in a similar direction. I don't see provincehood in the cards for any of the 3 in the near future though.
From: Um, The Yukon. | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 12 December 2005 07:55 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by arborman:
I'd much prefer to see several of the existing larger provinces split in half along an East-West line.

Prince George the capital of Northern BC & Yukon.


Interesting thought. BC suffers badly from so much population in the Southwest, and so little elsewhere. Vancouver often decides the fate of the Province.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Yukoner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5787

posted 12 December 2005 08:02 PM      Profile for Yukoner   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cougyr:

Interesting thought. BC suffers badly from so much population in the Southwest, and so little elsewhere. Vancouver often decides the fate of the Province.


Same could be said for every province east of the Maritimes....follow that 49th parallel


From: Um, The Yukon. | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Québécois in the North
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10727

posted 12 December 2005 09:28 PM      Profile for Québécois in the North     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Actually, has Yukonner pointed, the work for devolution of province-like powers to the Territory is already ongoing.

Yukon have signed their agreement. NWT (where I live) is having a hard time at the negociation table. Nunavut is far from a deal but pushing hard.

Those agreements are tripartite negociations (Feds-Territory-Aboriginal leadership/self-governements). So it includes devolution to the territories, but also to the many nations they encompass. Has most of these nations don't have self-government deals (Only the Tlicho have such a deal) and that some don't have settled land claim this devolution tging is set to evolve to give more powers to self-governments in the time being.

In the NWT we can hope that in some 20 years from now the territorial government will just be a centralized federal-like structure with the real powers given to aboriginal self-governments.

That being said, the territories already have jurisdiction over Health, Education, Languages (in the NWT we have 11 official languages), Environment and Natural Resources, Municipalities and a whole bunch of other things.

Basically, all that we lack to claim provincehood is posession of the land and the right to collect royalties on natural resources. That is why 80% of our budget comes from federal subsidies.


From: Yellowknife | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca