• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Three Nations of Canada (2016 version)

Status
Not open for further replies.

quadrapiper

Sr. Member
Reaction score
45
Points
330
Chris Pook said:
That is why I suggest that Vancouver dominates the Fraser Valley and imposes its European aspirations despite not having a European wallet.
Wonder what the governmental solution for that area might be?

Geography of the area suggest that everything between Hope and Squamish needs to be on the same page on certain issues (infrastructure, transit & transportation, etc.), but how to get that done without the urban and suburban bloc around City of Vancouver hanging on to all the money?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
555
Points
1,060
quadrapiper said:
Wonder what the governmental solution for that area might be?

Geography of the area suggest that everything between Hope and Squamish needs to be on the same page on certain issues (infrastructure, transit & transportation, etc.), but how to get that done without the urban and suburban bloc around City of Vancouver hanging on to all the money?

Make that the urban block.  The suburbs weren't getting much of the gravy.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,453
Points
940
My experience in government, is that no matter how carefully you draw a line, it’s always going to cause someone a headache, you can reduce the effect by planning, but you never remove it entirely. Municipal governments are the worst in my opinion, quite happy to meddle in everyone’s business and will happily blame everything on the Province and or Feds.
 

a_majoor

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
30
Points
560
Chris Pook said:
With respect to the Fraser Valley, a constant complaint in Aldergrove was that we were incorporated into the GVRD but at the very edge of the region.  We had gas stations on one side of the street in the GVRD and in Abbotsford on the otherside.  Guess which ones got the local business?

This is very much part of Kaplan's observations about the gtrowth of Exurban pods and the "urbanization" of river valleys. This is also evident in many parts of SW Ontario, especially in the "Golden Horseshoe", where the reach of the urban planners goes far afield. Even in my home town of London, the city long ago annexed much of the county of Middlesex (although the primary reason was to trap business and landowners trying to escape city taxes and regulation). As noted, edge effects are always difficult to deal with, and municipal governments here can pass the buck  with the best (although with the Liberals in power at both Queen's Park and Ottawa, this might be a game with diminishing returns).
 

quadrapiper

Sr. Member
Reaction score
45
Points
330
Thucydides said:
This is very much part of Kaplan's observations about the gtrowth of Exurban pods and the "urbanization" of river valleys. This is also evident in many parts of SW Ontario, especially in the "Golden Horseshoe", where the reach of the urban planners goes far afield. Even in my home town of London, the city long ago annexed much of the county of Middlesex (although the primary reason was to trap business and landowners trying to escape city taxes and regulation). As noted, edge effects are always difficult to deal with, and municipal governments here can pass the buck  with the best (although with the Liberals in power at both Queen's Park and Ottawa, this might be a game with diminishing returns).
Watching growth on Vancouver Island, it almost seems like a revision is needed as far as how city boundaries are set: perhaps expanding city boundaries with the suburban border would encourage better results. Currently, looking at Duncan as an example, you have the City proper, then a great surrounding ring of development that is, functionally, of a single unit with Duncan, but that falls under the Cowichan Valley Regional District.
 

a_majoor

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
30
Points
560
I'd be curious to see if the Cowichan Valley Regional District has different taxes and regulations than Duncan, which would explain why people preferr the "ring of development" to the urban centre?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
555
Points
1,060
Or they could just prefer to have some space between them and their neighbours and easy access to both Safeways and the great outdoors.  15 minutes by car either way.
 

foresterab

Member
Reaction score
10
Points
180
Chris,

Interesting take on the politics and issues within Canada.  Having lived in mostly northern and rural areas across Canada I would offer a different take:
1) Areas of mainly paved roads with fully developed infrastructure - this is the traditional golden horseshoe area of the St. Lawrence corridor but would also include most of Canada's major centers such as Vancouver or Edmonton. 
2) Areas of paved main corridor but limited infrastructure.  Gravel roads are common - this is the city of Thunder Bay/Prince George/Saskatoon that is surrounded but a primarily rural population and lacks both the infrastructure and population to expand to the level 1 areas.  Despite this local politics and/or provincial politics treat these centers as larger than they are. 
3) Areas with no road or limited road.  You hope roads have gravel.  This is dominated by primarily aboriginal populations and/or single resource dominated towns and access for what many folks consider "necessary" in area 1 communities often involves transitioning multiple zones and cultures within Canada.

Unfortunately for Canada most of our politics are based upon an East West band dominated by highways (historically railways) while local politics are often north/south rural/urban splits.  There are success stories but the successes have usually been driven by local development pushing the agenda (Dawson Creek-Prince George Highway) and/or massive resource finds(i.e. Sudbury)  and/or massive government investment (Alaska Highway/Canol Road).  The trick will be for government to anticipate development and infrastructure corridors while doing the difficult work of involving neighboring jurisdictions to allow grow to match and flow seamlessly - way easier said than done and not always practical in reality (look at the new Windsor, Ont. bridge crossing to Michigan).

Worth a few coffee's discussing anyways.  Thanks for the post and the follow up information in the discussion.
foresterab
 

quadrapiper

Sr. Member
Reaction score
45
Points
330
Thucydides said:
I'd be curious to see if the Cowichan Valley Regional District has different taxes and regulations than Duncan, which would explain why people preferr the "ring of development" to the urban centre?
Entirely possible - by ring of development, I was referring to the suburban (much of it quite dense) zones immediately abutting the city.

Drifting the thread like a barge off Victoria... doing some poking around, turns out the city looked at expansion ten years ago. Also appears they have a CVRD director.
 

7Isleblue

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Indeed, some people get panicked or over-hyped when they think about instant separation the day after a potential winning referendum. As a Quebeccer, I'll try and answer your questions to the best of my ability and with neutrality in mind, as always.

Quebec has a keen interest in Labrador, especially since the border is already contested and Quebec never recognized the Privy Council's decision. Other than that, the geographical status quo would be maintained: the Eastern Townships, even if highly populated by anglophones, remain majoritarily francophone. As for the East-West divide, the separatist government would likely use that as leverage, just like the Saint-Laurent waterway, to force Canada into cooperation.

As for the debt itself, it is a result of the Canadian Federal Government's decisions, which the Quebec government has no authority over, as such, Quebec is not legally forced to pay any part of it. Take for example, a young adult leaving his parents' house, he is not legally bound to pay his raisers' debt in any way. But for the sake of healthy bilateral relations, let's imagine Quebec accepts to take a part of it, which would likely be between 15 and 25% percent depending on the calculation method (population-based, GDP-based, Spending-based, etc.). But just as in interpersonal debt transfers, it also involves an asset transfer equal in proportional value to the debt percentage transfer. That said, Quebec could just aswell decide to nationalize any non-diplomatic foreign government-held propriety on its territory, such as CFBs, Federal Bridges, etc, without taking any debt. That'd be an ******* move, though, and bad for relations with its second economic partner.

Speaking of economic partnership, Quebec would probably refuse to give Canada (ON) a link to the maritimes, as that would mean cutting off Quebec from its most important economic partner, the US. As for the money, it would probably be a long transfer between the CAD and the "QCP?"(QuebeC Piastre, "piastre" being the most common slang for 1$ in Quebec) over the course of a decade or two. All currently living Quebecers would be granted both citizenships and subsequent generations would receive only the Quebec citizenship after separation has been fully completed (possible delay of 15-25 years). There is no doubt that monetary transfers would be gradually cut off during the separation, both inwards and outwards (respectively 60 and 40 billion, approx) and Quebec would have to make use of its new-found independence and proceed to some financial and structural clean up, (fighting corruption, fiscal evasion) as well as displacing some money from social programs to economic investment to make up for the 20 billion disparity.

Last but not least, Quebec's military, akin to its currency, would probably take decades before obtaining monopoly, as the first few years would probably be comparable to a protectorate (ie; British Dominion of Canada), followed by a strong integration in NORAD, and finally an autonomous self-defense force. Unlikely that it would join NATO, considering Quebeccers are mostly anti-militaristic (frig me...), lean rather in favour of Russia, and in disfavour of Turkey.

Oh, and the federal institutions in Quebec are manned by... Quebeccers. So the services would just be transferred to the Quebec government and it probably wouldn't affect much.

In any case, if Quebec were to seceed and the other Canadian nations to follow suit, I believe Canada would remain a strong historico-cultural heritage uniting "ex-canadians", akin to say, a German and a Belgian's attachment to Europe.


Inb4: I am not in favour of any political action, I simply observe and analyze. That's what I do.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,453
Points
940
foresterab said:
Chris,

Interesting take on the politics and issues within Canada.  Having lived in mostly northern and rural areas across Canada I would offer a different take:
1) Areas of mainly paved roads with fully developed infrastructure - this is the traditional golden horseshoe area of the St. Lawrence corridor but would also include most of Canada's major centers such as Vancouver or Edmonton. 
2) Areas of paved main corridor but limited infrastructure.  Gravel roads are common - this is the city of Thunder Bay/Prince George/Saskatoon that is surrounded but a primarily rural population and lacks both the infrastructure and population to expand to the level 1 areas.  Despite this local politics and/or provincial politics treat these centers as larger than they are. 
3) Areas with no road or limited road.  You hope roads have gravel.  This is dominated by primarily aboriginal populations and/or single resource dominated towns and access for what many folks consider "necessary" in area 1 communities often involves transitioning multiple zones and cultures within Canada.

Unfortunately for Canada most of our politics are based upon an East West band dominated by highways (historically railways) while local politics are often north/south rural/urban splits.  There are success stories but the successes have usually been driven by local development pushing the agenda (Dawson Creek-Prince George Highway) and/or massive resource finds(i.e. Sudbury)  and/or massive government investment (Alaska Highway/Canol Road).  The trick will be for government to anticipate development and infrastructure corridors while doing the difficult work of involving neighboring jurisdictions to allow grow to match and flow seamlessly - way easier said than done and not always practical in reality (look at the new Windsor, Ont. bridge crossing to Michigan).

Worth a few coffee's discussing anyways.  Thanks for the post and the follow up information in the discussion.
foresterab

Yes, recently the BC gov completed the NW transmission line up towards Dease lake, but halted it before it got to any of the towns (Iskut/Dease lake) It's mainly there to support Resource extraction. One of the mining companies have offered to push it further if they build their mine. I would like to see the WAC Bennett proposed rail line finished to Dease lake and long term plan to push rail into the Yukon eventually to Whitehorse, and then reconnect the Yukon Pass line to Whitehorse as well (different gauge) Continue to improve the roads North so they can be year round and start consider more rail routes as well. Maybe Ft Nelson- Ft Simpson then to Coppermine
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
555
Points
1,060
My concern with that strategy Colin, is that it still leaves you with some very thing tendrils creating very narrow corridors with very little traffic.  A network, a grid is necessary so that there are many mutually supporting paths.

If you take a look at the great 19th century railroads -  Canadian Pacific, Trans-Siberian, Cape-Cairo, - even the successful ones didn't create an effect more than a few miles on either side of the tracks.

The prairies grew by a combination of gridlines and sidelines with the rail lines connecting to a grain elevator every 8 miles, the distance a horse-drawn wagon could cover in a day.  The terrain permitted that amount of rail to be laid easily and cheaply.  But it hasn't been supportable.  Even the road network that has replaced it is difficult to sustain, with something like 75% of the roads out here being gravel roads and Saskatchewan struggling to be able to keep their paved roads intact because of the low population density.

I am convinced that Canada, like Africa and much of northern Asia, and probably South America needs a different transportation paradigm - one that is compatible with low population densities.  One that eschews high cost infrastructure.  The  Persians and the Romans introduced the Highway system.  Robert Stephenson merely replaced oxen with steam.

We need transportation that does not require the creation and maintenance of permanent rights of way.  Something more akin to the nomad's horse than the farmer's ox cart.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,453
Points
940
As for the North, there are strategic requirements and once you place infrastructure, things can happen. A road gives you great flexibility both in usage and placements, but higher operating costs for users and maintainers. Rail allows the cheap movement of bulk resources with limited flexibility. Powerlines provide connection and reduce the need to transport significant quantities of fuels. Power lines can be paired with phone/fiberoptics (which can also be paired with rail and road). Airports and air navigation system give point interconnection, but with limitations. Riverene access has lower costs, but does need the right geographic features and enough traffic to maintain viability.

It is the role of government to look ahead and conduct these large infrastructure projects that can move the country forward. Beyond these massive projects other important ones are improving telecommunications in the North  (North of the 52nd Parallel) and improving road access to large communities like Prince George, both of these to make them more attractive and draw the population North. I would also offer very lucrative tax rates and such for Greenhouses running on NG further north where road and gas access is available.     
 

a_majoor

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
30
Points
560
For Canada's underpopulated regions, this is Westjet/bush plane country (Westjet to the hubs, bush planes radiating out to the dispersed communities.

This makes for a negative feedback loop, since logistics are more difficult and general cost of living and doing business become higher as well. This means fewer people will want to move there (especially the Nintendo nation. What did people do before WiFi and 3G networks?). Even comms is more difficult, especially since people want to be connected like the South Koreans with crazy fast download speeds rather than wait for (and pay for) satelite uplinks or HF radio.

There have been some ideas on futurist sites like NextBigFuture which suggest technologies that would allow for dispersed and distributed living at costs an order of magnitude below what we have today, but most of that is either theoretical or in advanced prototyping. Even if in full prodution, it would benefit people in the urbanized regions to an equal or greater degree, leaving everyone at the same levels of competative (dis)advantage.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
233
Points
710
Realistically the only viable driver for expanded development of the "there be Dragons" regions of Canada is resource extraction.  If it's economically viable for companies to extract X, Y or Z from an undeveloped region they will bring the people in (or hire and train locals) to do so. 

The government could try to tilt the balance on viability by providing subsidies or assisting in building infrastructure to support the extraction but you risk failure if the subsidies aren't maintained to keep it viable. 

Get enough people working in an area extracting resources and support industries will become viable and eventually you'll have enough people to support and justify more infrastructure.

 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,453
Points
940
Pretty much the history of Canada, actually the North parts of BC, both coastal and inland used to be much more populated, towns of 3,000 people have withered and died. Bella Coola used to be the main food supplier for the Yukon Gold rush, now most of those farms are sliding back to forest. Each Province and Territories should sit down and discuss with it’s stakeholders, where the majority of invest and infrastructure should be spent outside of existing metropolitan areas. With the goals of making the North more livable and self-sustaining and open up areas of economic interests. The Feds can layout what Terms of References they use to consider such projects. Each Province submits and the Feds choose the projects that fit the ToR’s and the most good for Canada in the long run. Engage major parties in the discussion so funding does not fade every election.   
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
780
Points
910
There are really only two reasons to develop things in the hinterlands.
1) To get exports to market.
2) To provide the needs of the urban populations.

Money spent in the hinterlands isn't spent for the benefit of the locals; it is spent for the benefit of trade and of the people who live in high-density communities.  When urbanites complain about disproportionate public spending in areas of low and very low population density, they are complaining about spending on themselves - but they are mostly unaware of it.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
555
Points
1,060
To put the point more plainly:

Lajeunesse-05.jpg


And The North starts as 55 N west of the Lakehead and at 49 N east of the Lakehead.  You can squeeze another two Europes in there and still not find a million Canadians.

5 diamond mines in an area the size of Switzerland in the Barren Lands and nobody home - and no permanent land links of any sort.

3000 km of power lines to feed a single mine isn't going to get the job done.  A C17 full of diesel and a generator would make more sense.  It would bring in about 3000 GJ or 900,000 kWh of energy.

 

foresterab

Member
Reaction score
10
Points
180
Brad Sallows said:
There are really only two reasons to develop things in the hinterlands.
1) To get exports to market.
2) To provide the needs of the urban populations.

Money spent in the hinterlands isn't spent for the benefit of the locals; it is spent for the benefit of trade and of the people who live in high-density communities.  When urbanites complain about disproportionate public spending in areas of low and very low population density, they are complaining about spending on themselves - but they are mostly unaware of it.

There is always the reverse economic pressures that get applied too though.  When living in NE BC (where Natural Gas $$ funded much of the Vancouver Olympic building) the local municipalities basically had to threaten to shut down the development before some monies were returned north - within a couple of years there was a lot more paved roads all of a sudden.  Same deal in Alberta with the twinning of highway 63 to Fort McMurray...

Unfortunately most people don't want to address the ripple effects of what disproportionate charges to rural/remote areas mean.  Here locally gas is usually 10 cents more a litre than Edmonton which is 2 hours away...so all the local resource industries have to add a premium to rates to recover costs.  But you go to Calgary - 3 hours away...the same shipping cost is usually around +2 cents/L.  There is some economies for tanker trucks going to a major center...but not that much given the number of gas stations that all use the same shipping company for refills.

It's for that reason the inter-provincial trade barriers are so key to break down in both regulations and certifications - each transfer of resource (people/monies/product) east west is a potential multiplication of wasted efforts.  Good news is it's slowly occurring, sector by sector at least in the west/northern territories as the issues get exposed and addressed (Can't speak to eastern Canada due to how long it's been since I lived there).
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,453
Points
940
I see the Real Estate crunch in Vancouver as sign and opportunity for the provincial government to start pushing to make other population centres more attractive. The Feds can help more northern communities upgrade basic infrastructure like sewage, power, telecommunications. Fro Transportation focus on major roads and rail. In the far North right now the major effect will need better airports and ports. we really do need more land routes up there. Proper infrastructure will mean cheaper and more reliable supply of goods. I was hoping this decade would be the one for mini-nuclear plants like the one proposed by Toshiba, but the accident in Japan has pushed that back by a least another decade. The North needs more decent paying and steady jobs, those jobs will support small businesses in the communities which will help with the social issues. 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top