Les raisons pourquoi un anglophone va voter pour le PQ

J'habite à Québec pour une bonne boute, mais j'ai jamais essayer d'écrire en français...donc svp excusez me plusieurs fautes pendant que j'explique les raisons pourquoi un "tête carré"  va voter pour les pésquistes.

La première chose à confronter c'est la question d'un referendum. Philippe Couillard joue la politique de peur en disant que la journée suite à une victoire pour le PQ Pauline Marois va commençer de préparer pour un 3e referendum.  Je ne le crois pas.  

Peut-etre une journée il y aura un autre vote sur la separation, mais pas cette année et même pas l'année prochaine.   Jamais? Moi, je ne sais pas...si ça arrive ça arrive.  Le Québec, c'est une societée democratique, et si les citoyen(ne)s décide qu'ils veut un 3e referendum dans les années qui viennent, ça c'est leur doit.

Juste pour soit cent pour cent clair, si il y aura un referendum demain, je voterai non.

Donc, pourquoi voter PQ?

Parce que j'aime tellement la langue et la culture française-québecoise et de mon avis, ce n'est que le PQ qui va le protéger et le promouvoir.  Est-ce qu'il y a un bésoin?  Quant à moi, oui.  Le centre commercial de Québec c'est Montréal, et il est arrivée à moi de trouver des gens qui parle pas français dans les coffee shops et les dépaneurs.  Récenement je suis allée dans un dep à Montréal et j'ai demandé.  "Vendez vous les timbres".  La reponse?  "Sorry, I don't speak French".

Comment ça?  Dans la ville de Montréal, à Québec en osti!!!  C'est pas grave pour moi, un anglophone....mais imaginez un(e) Québecois(e) unilangue, dans un commerce de sa propre nation....pas capable d'avoir la service dans sa/son propre langue....la seul langue officiel de Québec.

Il y a d'autres raisons aussi.  Moi, je suis pas un idéologue.  Je suis pas gauchiste, ni sur le doit.  Et je trouve que le gouvernement PQ récent, ils essayent de faire le ménage sur les finances publique. Ce n'est pas un job façile car il n'y jamais assez de l'argent pour tous les bésoins.  Les commissions scolaires font des plaintes sur les coupures, mais c'est les choses ce qu'il faut faire pour nettoyer le portefeuille publique.  

Meme avec l'exploration pour l'huile sure l'ile Anticosti.  Est que ca va marcher?  Je ne sais pas, mais c'est pas un billet de lotto, comme disait M. Couillard, c'est un investisement...et avec des investisements il y des risques.

Quant aux plusieurs sondages M. Couillard serai le prochain PM de Québec, mais moi....je crois de moins en moins dans les sondages.

On va voir.  

Does tolerating intolerance make one tolerant? Québec's secular charter

Québec's secular or 'values' charter is quite the paradox.  Those who are opposed to it accuse proponents of being xenophobic and intolerant.  Supporters of the charter consider detractors to be supporters of intolerance.  So who are the intolerant ones, the supporters of the charter or its detractors?

While the legislation is aimed at banning many different religious symbols from being worn in certain public spaces, the flashpoint for discussion is the various forms of head and/or full body coverings worn by some Muslim women.  

Québec society is very secular in nature.  I go to church here on a semi regular basis, a Roman Catholic church, and my wife and I are always among the youngest attendees.  The congregations are dominated by elderly parishioners, if I had to guess I'd put the average at somewhere between 70 and 80 years of age.  

Why have so many Québecers turned their backs on a church that at one time was such a huge part of their identity?  One of the reasons is Rome's treatment of women.  Women here were the last Canadians to be given the right to vote in provincial elections.  It wasn't until 1944 that Québec women could vote for their provincial MNAs.  

A big opponent to the cause of suffrage was the Roman Catholic Church. Then Québec cardinal Rodrigue Villeneuve objected to women voting based on the perceived authority structure of the family, that is to say MEN ARE IN CHARGE.

The government of that day opted to be intolerant of Roman Catholicism's intolerance when it came to equality of the sexes, and it was obviously the right choice.

In that light it should not be surprising that many Québecers support the charter.  They see it as a continuation of the feminist movement and a fight for the equality between women and men.

And frankly I have to say I agree.

Even Québec Liberal MNA Fatima Houda-Pépin, the only Muslim woman in the National Assembly, supports at least some aspects of the charter.  Actually that should be former Liberal MNA, as her opposition to her party's negative stance on the charter has forced her to leave the party and sit as an independent.

Now I'm not suggesting that there isn't a red neck element who support the charter for reasons more xenophobic....yes, there are plenty of those.  But sometimes even small and wrong minded people can be in favour of positive change, even if its for the wrong reasons.  

Québec's values charter, starting to win me over

Like anyone I can be prone to knee jerk reactions, its normal. When Québec proposed values charter was first put forth I was opposed.  I cheered when I saw an Ontario ad seeking to attract employees of the Islamic faith to Lakeridge health centre in Oshawa with the tag line:  

"We don't care about what's on your head, but with what's in your head"...or words very close to that effect.

The charter struck me as xenophobic and intolerant.  My view however is changing.

Religious extremists are anything but tolerant.  Men who insist their wives cover their faces, and in some cases their entire bodies, are not viewed as models of inclusion and open mindedness...quite the contrary. Religious extremists of any faith seek to subjugate anyone who doesn't adhere to their interpretation of the almighty's will.  

I still can foresee a myriad of problems with enforcing such a charter, but the debate it has created is very much worth while.  Bravo to my home province and to the Parti Québecois for having the cajones to put something like this out there for public discourse.  Other parts of Canada I think would be too timid for fear of offending.

Debate is a positive thing, and only cowards run from controversy.  

For those who can read French here's an excellent article from LaPresse, wondering what is the opinion of Liberal MNA Fatima Houda-Pépin, the only Muslim member of the Québec National Assembly.  Unfortunately while she has spoken out against extremism in the past, on the charter she is silent.

On aimerait vous entendre, Fatima Houda-Pépin

One Anglo-Quebecer's take on the language debate

The anglophone community has deep roots in Quebec, I however do not.  

I moved to Quebec back in October of 2011, so that's less than two years that I have been residing here in the provincial capital of Quebec City.  When it comes to opinions on Quebec's never ending language debate the views of anglophones are as varied as the community itself.

This is mine.

A bit on my frame of reference.  Prior to moving here I had already attained a fair degree of fluency in the French language.  I studied French throughout high school and into university, and I spent six weeks the summer I turned eighteen on New Brunswick's Acadian Penninsula taking a French Immersion course.

My facility in the language was  sufficient enough for me to find employment in customer service, sales and account management positions in the Toronto area.   I never, and still have not, attained what I consider perfect fluency, but I do consider myself more than functionally bilingual.

Suffice to say I place a high degree of value on bilingualism and have more than a bit of sympathy for those who strive to protect and promote the French language in Quebec.   I embraced the opportunity to move here, and I love living in Quebec.

The two issues dominating discussion of late are limiting access to English schools for Quebec students and the  removal of bilingual status from some municipalities.

It goes without saying that Quebec is a French island surrounded by an ocean of the English language.  If the French language is to survive and thrive in this environment, then barriers need to be constructed to protect it from being flooded.  The damn protecting la langue française is already showing major cracks on the island of Montreal.  A French speaking Quebecer can go into a west island convenience store and find they have to speak English at the counter.

The debate comes down to individual rights versus that of a society as a whole.

Quebecers have elected a government which places a high priority on protecting and promoting the use of French and is proposing legislation which reflects the direction in which they wish to take the society.

In terms of education, those parents whose kids are denied access to an English public school can still enroll their children in a private school that is English.  Some consider that unfair, and argue that they're being denied a fundamental right.  But does the overall society not have a fundamental right to defend itself from being assimilated?

Its a difficult question for sure.  The same issues apply to municipal governments losing their bilingual status which would result in the loss of English language services.

Our federal government  protects the entertainment industry with content rules that prevent our marketplace from being overrun with programming and music from the United States on our public airwaves.  Quebec is acting in similar fashion, but here it goes beyond programming and extends further in an effort to protect the language.

If the French language is to survive here, I would argue that it is needed.

Now for those who might point to the tenuous minority status of Quebec's  PQ government and the mere thirtyish percent of the popular vote they garnered, I would suggest a closer look at the numbers.  In addition to the Parti Québecois there are two other nationalist parties here, and combined with the PQ they garnered in the neighborhood of forty percent of the vote.  No where close to a majority certainly, but still significant.

Given the minority situation Quebecers will likely have a chance to pass judgement on Mme Marois' governance and initiatives sooner rather than later, that's democracy.  At that point it will come down to a decision about which direction Quebecers want this province to take, and on how much of a priority protecting the French language represents.

Québec considers lowering voting age to 16?

Recent news is suggesting that Québec Premier Pauline Marois is intrigued with the thought of extending voting rights to 16 and 17 year olds.  -CTV STORY HERE-

Québec's first minister was in Scotland recently, where a vote on independence will take place in 2014.  Scotland will be allowing 16 and 17 year old citizens to vote in a referendum on separation.  There are many who consider the PQ's popularity among the youth of Québec to be strong, I am one of them, so extending voting rights to a younger demographic certainly makes sense in that light.

But what about the rest of our democracy?  Should our political parties consider giving high school students a say in more than just voting during a Québec referendum, but in other elections as well?

Teenagers voting???  Gimme a....wait a minute, this makes sense.

Think about it.  All you basically need to vote in Canada is a birth certificate saying you're over 18 and a pulse, that's pretty much it.  It doesn't matter if you can't name even  three of Canada's ten provinces, or if you think the Prime Minister of our country is George Washington Lincoln Gretzky, here's a ballot go mark your X. 

Why shouldn't older teenagers be given a say in determining Canada's future, be it at the federal, provincial, regional, or municipal level...oh yeah, let's not forget school boards.  Damn this country is so over governed.

If a 90 year old who is likely departing this world in the next few years has the legal right to vote, why not someone who in all likelihood will be contributing to Canadian society for the next fifty years or more?

Time for Marois to show some leadership

I'm an anglophone Quebecer, I do speak French, however given that English is my mother tongue I am obviously most comfortable expressing myself in Canada's other official language.

When out and about with my wife we invariably default to English in our conversation.  The resident love goddess is just starting to learn French and will be beginning full time classes in the new year. We've never had an issue or a confrontation, in fact I often have to ask politely to be spoken to in French.  

With that being said, it is obvious that recent events here in Quebec are causing me some concern.  This evening's news had a story about a woman who, along with her young son, were hit with eggs, apparently for speaking English.

Global Montreal News Item Here

This comes after a recent story and video showing pro-separatists driving over, and wiping their feet, on the Canadian flag.

I haven't blogged on this before because Quebec is my home, and I find the vast majority of Quebecers to be warm and inviting people.  There are bad apples in every bushel and Quebec has a few certainly.  But  I didn't think drawing attention to the few bad apples would serve any purpose, other than to stir up anti Quebec sentiment, of which there is too much already.

Unfortunately stories like this are becoming too common, and its time for the political leadership in Quebec to take a strong and principled stand.  Je parle à vous Mme Marois.  Réne Lévesque had his flaws like everyone, but he knew how to stand up to extremists.  Does Pauline Marois have it in her to be a true leader like the founder of her party?

Sadly politics in this country has degenerated into a marketing strategy.  Polling the electorate and identifying the issues important to a core group of supporters large enough to get you elected.  Leadership used to be about outlining a direction for a society and then convincing people  that you're right, polls be damned.  

Mme Marois needs to show this type of leadership.  She has to be forceful in repudiating the actions of some of her most militant separatist supporters.  Is Quebec a modern and enlightened democracy that believes in tolerance, or a xenophobic hateful society?

The PQ's slogan during the most recent election was "C'est à nous de choisir".  Alors Mme Marois, c'est maintenant à vous de choisir! Are you going to pander to fear and intolerance?  Or do you have the royal jelly to be a strong and forceful advocate for the principles of inclusion, tolerance and ultimately democracy.

Harper government fighting Québec's law and order efforts‏

The federal long gun registry is back in the news. 

Québec has just won an injunction preventing the federal government from destroying the long gun registry, and has given Ottawa 30 days to comply by handing over the data collected on Québec gun owners. Those employed in law enforcement are happy no doubt.  (CBC Story Here)

The Canadian association of chiefs of police had argued for maintaining the registry as it provides them with what they consider a very valuable tool. I find it hard to argue with our police on this point. When officers respond to a call for something like a domestic dispute, I'm sure they like to know ahead of time if there are firearms in the house. 

Is it perfect? Of course not, but information can be a powerful tool. And if that information can be used to improve the safety of law enforcement personnel and the public, then I'm all for it. 

One of the points against the registry has been the price tag, but I have trouble buying this argument. Reports say the cost is in the neighbourhood of $4 million per year. That's chump change compared to the billions Ottawa is commited to spending on new prisons, US style 'super jails' we're going to be building despite a rapidly declining crime rate. 

Then there's the millions being spent to clean up immigration fraud. I realize that the immigrants being investigated represent less than one tenth of one percent of the total, but despite the cost I like the idea of Canadian citizenship not being for sale. If the money is there to fight immigration fraud and to build more prisons, certainly we can find a few million to help those employed in law enforcement. 

And the Harper goverment won't be the ones paying for it anymore, it will be Québec taxpayers, and likely other provincial governments who are strong on law and order and in providing police with the tools they need.

Time to stop stressing about Québec

We Canadians love to worry, we worry about the economy, about the weather, about the direction our elected representatives are taking the country.  When we've had Liberal governments in Ottawa, right wingers have worried about big government.  When its Conservatives on parliament hill we worry about Canada becoming a playground for business interests at the expense or ordinary taxpayers.

Worry, worry, worry.  And when we're not worrying, we're complaining.  Complaining about the same things we worry about and more.  We love to carp about long line ups and gas prices and all manner of things we really can't do much about.

And now, thanks to the recent Quebec provincial election we have something else to worry and complain about, a separatist Parti Québecois government.  

My advice, its time to chill out.

Yes the Parti Québecois has as its ultimate goal the removal of Québec from Canadian confederation, we all know that.  But it isn't happening any time soon, and probably not at all.  Pauline Marois and her party barely squeaked out a victory over Jean Charest's Liberals.  Even running against a tainted and tired government mired in allegations of corruption, the PQ couldn't even manage one third of the popular vote.  

Mme Marois is the sixth Pequiste first minister in Quebec's history. That's right, she's following in the footsteps of Levesque, Pierre Marc Johnson, Parizeau, Bouchard and Landry.  And Quebec is still here, still a part of Canada despite two referendums.

And I am certain that not everyone who voted PQ wants sovereignty.  Not when they've already achieved so much of what they've historically been looking for when the Harper government's recognized Québec as a distinct society.  

There are other reasons for Québecois to vote PQ.  The PQ has strong support with labour, and when unions do well the middle class is strengthened.  Limiting the amount of money that can be donated to political parties and eliminating the tax deductions that go with it is another.  

So relax English Canada, Quebec has elected PQ governments before and it very well may again, that's democracy.  Might I even dare suggest coming for a visit?  This is an absolutely incredible part of the country, and like many places in Canada, the people are warm and friendly.  

Don't wait for a referendum to show your love, take a trip and check out Montreal's nightlife, the Gaspé Peninsula with its incredible scenery, historic Québec City.  Drop in and offer up greetings, and if you really want to show some love, say bonjour instead of hello.

Confrontation over language on the streets of Montréal - Video

I wasn't sure whether or not to share this particular video.  It shows a confrontation between a French Quebecer  and his girlfriend with a group of Asian Canadians who had the temerity to be speaking English in public.  My hesitancy was due to the fact that it portrays what is now my home province in a not too positive light.  It lends credence to the perception of Quebec as a xenophobic and intolerant society.

Unfortunately, there is some merit to that point of view.

I have some sympathy for French Quebecers and for their desire to protect and promote their language.  I will admit that at times I have had similar feelings when I've been in Toronto, riding on a bus or subway and hearing a foreign tongue spoken loudly.  I never objected in any way, and certainly never confronted anyone.  

Of course the English language's dominance in the city of Toronto isn't even close to being challenged.  That's not the case in Montreal, I myself have been to places of business in that city and have been told that they don't speak French.  

Take a look and judge for yourself.  I'd be interested in any comments readers would care to share.

No winners in Quebec's election, only losers

Its hard to discern any winners after yesterday's election here in Québec.  

Sure Pauline Marois' Parti Québecois will form the next government, but despite polling showing the PQ on the cusp of winning the 63 seats needed for a clear majority, they fell well short at 54 with only 32% of the popular vote. If they could have won even 60 or 61, Mme Marois' position would have been one of strength. Instead she's left in charge of a weak minority government that will have to placate either the Liberals or CAQ to remain in power. 

François Legault's CAQ party was looking for a breakthrough, and while 19 seats is a decent showing, they're right now very much a 3rd party. With the PQ and the Liberals holding 54 and 50 seats respectively the challenge will be for Monsieur Legault to attract the attention of voters and build on this result for a stronger showing in the next election. 

Québec Solidaire won the two seats most pollsters predicted for this nascent separatist party. But with the PQ in a weak minority position, at best all they can do is try to prop up an already wobbly table. 

And that leaves the Liberals, who went from majority rule to opposition with leader Jean Charest failing to hold on to his own seat. Had Monsieur Charest managed to win in Sherbrooke the Liberals could have put a positive spin on things by saying they substantially beat expectations. Hard to push that script however when the leader of the party doesn't even have a seat in the legislature. Obviously Mr. Charest is contemplating his future.

Perhaps a run at for the federal Liberal leadership?

So there are no real winners, except perhaps voters. With elected officials on a short leash hopefully we'll get responsible government.

Québec election asks more questions than it answers

So the results are in, we have a minority PQ government here in Québec, that is unless there are numerous recounts that result in a number of riding switching hands, which I somehow doubt.

My best guess was that the PQ would win between 60 and 65 seats, and if the 57 seats they're currently showing don't change, well I wasn't too far off.  I was surprised somewhat by the strong Liberal performance, (like many) but not shocked.  I opted for Québec's Liberals about two weeks ago, but was hesitant to consider Jean Charest getting a late push given that my own bias might be playing a part.

Of course now the question begs.  What comes next?

I can see a myriad of possibilities.  Will Mme Marois have cabinet positions to offer some members of the CAQ party as an enticement to cross the floor?  As the news unfolds I'll be checking to see how many former separatists were elected under the CAQ banner.  

I think a lot will depend on the final numbers.  Assuming support from Quebec Solidaire's two elected members, the PQ  will be tantalizingly close to the magic number of 63 needed to control a majority of the votes in the National Assembly.  Still, three is probably just out of reach in terms of luring members from the CAQ.

We shall see, as I say the final numbers will tell the tale.  In an election this close I expect there will be some recounts and it might be days before we have the exact final tally.  Then there's the possiblity of the CAQ either propping up Marois, or joining forces with the Liberals to force another election.  

The bottom line however is that Québec is stronger than the political process, as is the case with Canada as a whole.  Whether it ends up being a stridently separatist government, or one where sovereignty takes a back seat, Quebecers will endure.  

Perhaps the biggest result is the likely exit of Jean Charest from the political scene.  It says here he has nothing to apologize for and history will judge him a masterful politician.  

Quebec's good, bad and ugly or the corrupt the xenophobes and the bankrupt

So what's it gonna be Québec? Will it be the xenophobic Parti Québecois, or perhaps the CAQ with all those candidates who've filed for personal or business bankruptcy? Might you still opt for the devil you know, the Liberals with all the allegations of corruption surrounding them?

I will stick with my prediction of a PQ win with between 60 and 65 seats. And assuming the separatist Québec Solidaire wins the two seats pollsters are expecting, 61 gives the PQ a workable government, if of course QS is ready to lend its support.

I'm prepared to be surprised though, by a surge in either CAQ or Liberal support. Based on polling numbers and the firmness of voting intentions among supporters of the various parties I consider a Liberal minority still a possibility, with an outright win by the CAQ being extremely remote.

If I were making book on the outcome and calculating odds this is how I'd handicap the race.

• PQ minority - 50%
• PQ majority - 30%
• Liberal minority - 10%
• Liberal majority - 5%
• CAQ minority - 3%
• CAQ majority - 2%

After the results are in I will share my experience as a first time voter in a Québec provincial election.

Québec's election winners..Students

Everyone is chiming in with their predictions for tomorrow's vote here in la belle...err province.  At least its still a province for now.

Overwhelmingly the expectation is that Pauline Marois and the PQ will  form either a strong minority or a thin majority.  I concur and predict somewhere between 60 and 65 seats for the Pequistes.  But the Parti Québecois isn't the big winner here, not even close.

Its the students, like it or lump it.

Efforts by the Charest government to increase tuition fees resulted in massive student protests, and in some cases violence.  After repeated attempts at negotiation with a hodgepodge of student unions the Liberal leader finally drew a line in the sand.  Despite reducing the amount of the hike and stretching it out over a longer period of time to mitigate the impact, many students remained defiant.

And they have won.

Pauline Marois has promised she will rescind the increases, going so far as suggesting students not pay their tuition bills until after the election.  And this is at least one promise I expect her and her party to keep.  If not the result would likely be more chaos.

By caving to the street Mme Marois has put both herself and her government at the mercy of mob rule in my opinion.  If her government is forced into some tough decisions that don't sit well with any number of groups, the recipe is now clear, just do what Québec's students did.  Take to the street, block traffic, intimidate and bingo...the PQ government will give in to what you want.

The student strikes and tuition increases were not a major issue in this campaign.  But it says here that going forward this issue and the PQ's handling of it during the campaign and afterwards will demonstrate to Quebecers the kind of government they've elected.

Could allegations of robocalls help Québec Liberals?

The Québec Liberal party is alleging that robocalls have been made in the Québec City area, as well as in Laval near Montreal.

It is being reported that the calls are being made exclusively in English, targeting predominantly French speaking areas.  Voters are being asked to call a phone number, and calling that number results in an answering machine message which basically says, 'thank you for calling the Liberal Party of Quebec...please leave a message.

You can read about here HERE on the Montreal Gazette's site.

Of course robocalls were allegedly used by Conservative supporters during the last federal election.  To say Harper and the Conservatives aren't thought of too kindly in Québec would be grossly understating things.  As Québec Solidaire's Françoise David put it during the first leader's debate. 

"Attacking Harper is easy.  Just about everyone in Québec can't stand him".

Anyone using a strategy linked with the federal conservatives is treading on dangerous ground if you ask me.  Assuming the calls are being generated by opponents of Charest's Liberals, then the most obvious suspects would be supporters of François Legault's Coalition Avenir Québec party as I see it.  The CAQ is generally perceived to be a right wing party, although only barely given the heavy tilt to the left of Québec politics.  

I have trouble envisioning it being the PQ, they would have little to gain from my perspective.  Turning voters inclined to vote Liberal  away would only drive them to the CAQ, and Monsieur Legault's party is the only one with any degree of momentum.

It is interesting that the calls are said to be only in English.  With protection and promotion of la langue française being such a hot issue during this campaign, I can see some French speakers being very alarmed at a party using automated calls only in English.

I am wondering though, if the reporting of these calls will generate some sympathy for the embattled Jean Charest and his floundering Liberal Party?  And I don't discount the possibility that perhaps they were employed for that very purpose.  Elections are becoming more and more like wars, and in war the first casualty is often the truth.  

Will Québec plunge Canada into more constitutional wrangling?

We'll know the answer Tuesday night, will Quebecers choose the separatist PQ, take a flyer on the populist CAQ or will they instead opt for the devil they know in Jean Charest and the Liberals.

Right now its looking like the PQ with a razor thin majority based on recent polling.  Even if they fall one or two seats shy of the magic 63 needed, they can likely count on support from the even more strident Québec Solidaire.  While the PQ is unquestionably separatist, QS is even more hard line, separatists on steroids if you will.

I'll have my prediction up on Labour Day.  

Some Quebecers like their politicians soft

How do you like your eggs? Hard boiled, once over lightly? Me, I like mine scrambled usually.

But what about the men and women elected to public office? The most recent polling numbers suggest that about 28% of Quebecers prefer their politicians to be soft, at least on the issue of independence.

François Legault used to be hard for separation, a real pitt bull. Now he says he changed his mind, he's no longer in favour of sovereignty. Does that mean he's hard for Federalism now? Well, no...not exactly. He's not really a Federalist either, instead he's using the word Nationalist to describe himself.

Nationalist...WTF does that mean?

Only in Québec. The political vocabulary in this province is different from what I'm used to, being a transplanted Ontarian. If someone tells me they're a nationalist, I would take that to mean that they're proud to be Canadian.

Mais pas içi.

In Québec's political culture you're either a federalist or a separatist. Either you're for Québec remaining a province in a united Canada or in favour of Québec separating and forming a new country. That's not to say there isn't some nuance allowed, your position can be either hard or soft.

I'm talking about politics here.

Whether one is a soft separatist or soft federalist, it really means the same thing. You swing both ways depending on the circumstances and wording of the question. A sort of political bisexuality if you will.

Hard is of course, just hard.

Jean Charest is hard, no question. He is a federalist through and through. Pauline Marois as well, although the opposite kind of hard as befitting a member of the opposite sex perhaps.

But François Legault? Well, there's no other way to describe his stance on this all important issue other than Soft.

Its nothing but political gamesmanship in my opinion, or as it is put here, chicanery. The CAQ leader is trying to walk both sides of the street, and so far its working. Like a Texas hold `em player who has made it to the final table, he sits happily with a decent size stack while the other two main players go all in.

I don't think the electorate here was expecting sovereignty to be a major issue. I suspect Mme Marois and the PQ would have preferred that the question of creating a new 'nation' via a referendum remain on the back burner . That might have allowed her to pick up Federalists in favour of protecting and promoting the French language and Québec culture. But the emergence of Québec Solidaire and to a lesser degree Option Nationale (the world National even swings both ways) forced her to put her chips in play.

Charest for his part has never left any doubt about his convictions on the question of Canadian unity.

September fourth is next week, and we'll know the results then. Who knows, in Québec politics maybe soft is best? It might make François Legault the King maker or perhaps even the King.

And if a vote on independence comes at same point, maybe there's some medication the CAQ leader can take to firm up his....uhm resolve.

Legault's CAQ party filling Separatist sails

Quebec Liberal party supporters could be excused for perhaps thinking that the idea for the creation of François Legault's CAQ party was to split the federalist vote.  After all the new political entity was created by an old Pauline Marois' cabinet colleague and separatist firebrand.

Thanks to Legault's easy answers campaign lots of traditional Liberal support is moving the CAQ's way.  And while voters may like the platform, its not like the CAQ has any hope of being elected.  At best Legault can hope to hold the balance of power in a minority PQ led National Assembly.

All those promises of one thousand new family doctors and major cuts to Quebec Hydro will never come to fruition.  Students and teachers worrying about going to war over proposed changes to education, with hours extended to 5 PM....you can relax.  Those are just populist ideas designed to woo older voters and they have no chance of ever needing to be acted upon.

That's not to suggest that the CAQ hasn't been an integral player in this election, far from it.  Unless you're ready to totally dismiss the current polling, as Jean Charest seems willing to do, then Quebec is going to elect the Separatist PQ with either a minority or a majority.  

Personally I think the chances of a majority are better than 50/50 as things stand now.  Its being suggested that the Liberal leader can't even count on winning his own seat.  If the PQ does form a majority the rest of Canada can get ready for a whole new round of Federalist - Nationalist battles, and a hit to investor confidence to boot.

Too bad Monsieur Legault abandoned the cause, the old François would have loved the thought of a reborn majority mandate for the separatist PQ, but then maybe.....Nah, no conspiracy theories today.

Québec - What happens after a vote for independence?

For some, perhaps for most, the question of Québec separation is a dead issue.  There are many who believe that the referendum in 1995 was the last kick at the can for those who want a sovereign Québec.

And they're probably right, maybe.

For my own part I view separation as still being a possibility, albeit unlikely.  I do think that the so called 'winning conditions' the likes of the Parti Quebécois envision can still come to pass.  I wrote about it recently here:  Québec's road to independence.

In broad strokes I think the winning conditions for a yes vote on independence would  be: 

1) The election of a majority PQ government

2) Deterioration of relations between Ottawa and the Québec government with Ottawa refusing to cede control of responsibilities like immigration and the administration of Employment Insurance.

3) Increased unpopularity of the Federal government in Québec.

4) The creation of a form of Québec citizenship with the possible disenfranchisement of non French speaking voters.

Doesn't seem like such a long shot viewed in that light does it?  

Some might point to recent polling which has the PQ only in minority territory.  However the electorate is volatile so I'm not going to put too much stock in polls.  Just witness Alberta's recent election.  On top of that I consider PQ voters as being perhaps more motivated.  And the PQ itself is likely more organized than its rivals, in particular the nascent Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ).  

So let's assume the PQ forms a majority and that a referendum does come to pass, with Québec voting for independence at some future date.  What then?

I'm no constitutional lawyer or expert, but this is what I think we'd be looking at.

Immediately after a vote for independence there would be euphoria for hardliners, uncertainty for many, and outright fear among some.  The island of Montréal would be in turmoil, with some packing up to leave and others vowing a referendum of their own.  Native communities likewise would be clamoring for the right to make up their own minds as to whether or not they want their lands and their citizenship to be accorded to Canada or Québec.

In short, there would be big trouble, and likely in my opinion, violence.  The hard line separatists having waited so long to finally win a vote for independence would not take kindly to those looking to rain on their parade and things would get ugly.

I have trouble seeing clearly what happens beyond that to be honest, but I have a pretty good idea.

The reaction in English Canada would be mixed as I see it.  Some would be saying good riddance, while others would take up the cause of the aboriginal and anglophone communities.  The east coast would be in angst over the complications of being part of a geographically divided confederation.

While all this hand wringing and debate is going on in Québec and in the rest of the country, I envision Québec's National Assembly voting on a unilateral declaration of independence, and naturally passing it based on the PQ's majority status.

English Canada would be in uproar citing the Clarity Act, with Québec waiting anxiously for recognition from foreign countries.  

Nobody would be happy, except for lawyers who would be having a field day.  

It could take years to settle, and I have no idea who would the winner would be.  The only thing of which I'm certain is that there would be plenty of losers.  The toll on the economy would be devastating as Canada would become like a leper as far as foreign investment is concerned.  

The comment section is open and I don't engage censorship so I'll leave it to readers to have at it.  I will delete those comments which are overly profane or of a threatening or menacing nature however.

Whaddyer think?

Why this voter is going with Québec's Liberals and Jean Charest

This will be my first time voting in a Québec election, and as everyone who reads this blog knows, (all four of you) I take my democratic franchise very seriously.

Given my lack of first hand knowledge of Québec politics I thought it would be best to inform myself as much as possible and to not dismiss any one party automatically, including the separatist Parti Québecois. In fact I was giving serious consideration to Pauline Marois' and the PQ until recently and explained my reasons with the following post:

An anglophone 'pur laine' considers voting Parti Québecois

The PQ lost this voter on several issues, one big one being citizenship.  Mme Marois' party wants to bring in a form of citizenship for Québec residents, with facility in the French language being a requirement.  She proposed at one point precluding non-French speakers from being allowed to run for political office in the province.  She's been all over the map, seemingly making up policy up on the fly, and later back tracked saying all current Québec residents would automatically have citizenship under her proposed plan.

What really scares me is the thought of a potential referendum, and then finding out that those who don't fit the PQ definition of Québecois(e) being disenfranchised.

Sorry Pauline, I believe in democracy.  If voters aren't happy with a candidate because she/he doesn't speak French, (or for any other reason) then they don't have to vote for that individual. C'est simple!!!

There were some Pequiste ideas I really liked though.  Term limits for Premiers and mayors being one, and limiting political donations to $100 per individual with no tax credit being another.

As for the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) and leader François Legault, I find them far to wishy washy, trying to be all things to all people and as a result they end up being nothing as far as I'm concerned.  Is Monsieur Legault separatist or federalist?  It strikes me he is trying to be both, and that doesn't cut it with this voter.

Finally that leaves the Liberals and Jean Charest.  But it isn't good enough to be voting against individuals or parties, you also have to be voting FOR something, and there's plenty that I like about Québec's current 1st minister.  

His handling of the student strikes and his willingness to make tough decisions is one prime example.

While I think the law banning protests was over the top, Monsieur Charest showed genuine leadership in my opinion.  Attempts to negotiate and to be conciliatory were made, however too many of the student groups were totally intransigent, a point even made by a member of the PQ.  

And of course his forthright and unwavering commitment to federalism is another.  In this election we have the PQ for those who want Québec to separate, the Liberals for those who want a united Canada, and the CAQ which wants both....or neither.

There's no perfect party, and certainly no perfect platform.  But this newly minted Québec voter will be marking an X next to the Liberal candidate's name with zero hesitation.  

Marois contre Legault face à face...For all the marbles?

With the Liberals seemingly bleeding, Jean Charest is reported to be trailing badly in his own riding, the debate between Pauline Marois and François Legault takes on even greater significance.  It seems quite possible that the winner might be able to find that elusive traction to carry him or her to power on September four.

The battle lines were drawn early, Legault presenting Mme Marois as the Queen of the Status Quo, while Mme Marois painted a picture of the CAQ leader picking fights with almost every sector in his efforts to clean up government.  

Sadly at about the half way point in the debate I lost the stream from the journaldequebec.com's website, thus this will be a short and....half assed commentary.

I thought the PQ leader was performing better than Monsieur Legault, she was far more composed with her former colleague than she seemed with Jean Charest. That's not to say there wasn't acrimony, there was plenty...an example being Legault's decision to leave government and the reasons.  But overall the tone was not nearly as heated as the two previous debates.

I should note however, that while I thought Mme Marois was out dueling M. Legault, the on-line voting taking place on the website had the CAQ leader far ahead with over 60% saying his was the better performance.

The debate is still going on, however my live stream is still not working.  I will post this now and add to it later if I'm able to continue watching.