Is Quebec Corrupt?

[August1991]

Macleans published a provocative front page recently with a Bonhomme Carnaval flush with cash, suggesting that Quebec is the most corrupt province in Canada. Was the front page provocative, or was it Quebec bashing?

Well, if Macleans had wanted to be really edgy, or provocative, Martin Patriquin would have stated that it is the federalists in Quebec that are the corrupt politicians in Quebec.

For understandable reasons, people in English Canada (specifically Ontario, Toronto) want to keep Canada together. In crude terms, they pay people in Quebec to stay in the Confederation. Why do these people in Ontario do this? (Because if Canada didn't exist, Ontario would be another Michigan and Toronto would be another Detroit.)

To make/pay people to do something that they wouldn't normally do requires large sums. There's alot of corruption involved.

Please don't say that I am shifting the debate from Quebec to Canada.

Quebec is no more corrupt than Norway, Belgium or Oregon. So-called federalists in Quebec are corrupt, because of how English Canada deals with Quebec.

----

In specific terms (and I realize that I am posting to English Canadians), who has been accused of corruption in Quebec? Charest, Chretien, Mulroney, Tremblay - all federalists.

What did Parizeau or Landry do? Did they take money?

Edited September 26, 2010 by August1991

[ReeferMadness]

You are shifting the debate from Quebec to Canada. Your post sounds like a mix between "The devil made me do it" and "The dog ate my homework".

[August1991]

You are shifting the debate from Quebec to Canada. Your post sounds like a mix between "The devil made me do it" and "The dog ate my homework".

Ah yes. Uncle Tom is one of my people; as if we're all the same.

(I'm sorry to shift the example to America but with English Canadians, I often don't know what else to do to make my point clear.)

[Argus]

For understandable reasons, people in English Canada (specifically Ontario, Toronto) want to keep Canada together. In crude terms, they pay people in Quebec to stay in the Confederation. Why do these people in Ontario do this? (Because if Canada didn't exist, Ontario would be another Michigan and Toronto would be another Detroit.)

So... if Ontario didn't have to send billions of dollars to prop up the Quebec welfare state every year Ontario would collapse? Funny how I've never seen an economic study or even projection which would suggest why that would be the case.

I'm not (obviously) one of those who wants to keep Quebec. I'd like to see Quebec gone. Not just gone but set sail and disappear over the bloody horizon. Their sense of arrogant self-importance (much as you demonstrate here) is so boorish I'd just as soon never see them again. And, as most Ontarions know, if Quebec ever did separate it would be asking Haiti for economic aide.

[nicky10013]

So... if Ontario didn't have to send billions of dollars to prop up the Quebec welfare state every year Ontario would collapse? Funny how I've never seen an economic study or even projection which would suggest why that would be the case.

I'm not (obviously) one of those who wants to keep Quebec. I'd like to see Quebec gone. Not just gone but set sail and disappear over the bloody horizon. Their sense of arrogant self-importance (much as you demonstrate here) is so boorish I'd just as soon never see them again. And, as most Ontarions know, if Quebec ever did separate it would be asking Haiti for economic aide.

It wouldn't be asking Haiti for aide but it would want to keep the same arrangements in place today. For the record, in Toronto specifically, only 8 cents of every tax dollar stays in Toronto. It ends up spent in another region of the country. If Canada fell apart it would probably benefit Toronto the most. The city would have roughly 11 billion extra for it's budget.

[Smallc]

It wouldn't be asking Haiti for aide but it would want to keep the same arrangements in place today. For the record, in Toronto specifically, only 8 cents of every tax dollar stays in Toronto. It ends up spent in another region of the country. If Canada fell apart it would probably benefit Toronto the most. The city would have roughly 11 billion extra for it's budget.

Maybe Toronto could be like a smaller example of Singapore?

[nicky10013]

Maybe Toronto could be like a smaller example of Singapore?

With give or take an extra 11 billion it could do pretty well. Singapore maybe a bad example, you know, due to the authoritarianism. Otherwise, it could be pretty successful. I don't want that to happen, I don't mind and I don't think most Torontonians care. Though, the rest of Canada....

Edited September 26, 2010 by nicky10013

[Smallc]

With give or take an extra 11 billion it could do pretty well. Singapore maybe a bad example, you know, due to the authoritarianism.

I was more talking about the example of a wealthy, city like, state.

[nicky10013]

I was more talking about the example of a wealthy, city like, state.

Oh yeah, but still, Torontonians don't want that.

[Smallc]

Oh yeah, but still, Torontonians don't want that.

Niether do I. I was only musing.

[ReeferMadness]

Ah yes. Uncle Tom is one of my people; as if we're all the same.

(I'm sorry to shift the example to America but with English Canadians, I often don't know what else to do to make my point clear.)

Well, you haven't made yourself clear.

Look, I don't know whether Quebec is more corrupt than anywhere else. But if it is, it's ridiculous to point the blame elsewhere. I recall a news story about the Montreal mayoral race and how the mob was involved in road construction contracts. True? You tell me. But is it someone else's fault? I can't see how.

By the way, the term "English Canada" is an insult. Canada is a cultural mosaic and has more dimensions than you can shake a stick at. The "two founding peoples" story is something Qubeccers like to hear because it justifies them having more importance than are justified democratically by the numbers. The "two founding peoples" story was never true because it ignores completely the First Nations. And it's less relevant today because it diminishes the role other ethnic groups have had in building this country.

Edited September 26, 2010 by ReeferMadness

[bush_cheney2004]

.....(I'm sorry to shift the example to America but with English Canadians, I often don't know what else to do to make my point clear.)

No need to be sorry....this is priceless...and what America is for!

[ironstone]

Macleans published a provocative front page recently with a Bonhomme Carnaval flush with cash, suggesting that Quebec is the most corrupt province in Canada. Was the front page provocative, or was it Quebec bashing?

Well, if Macleans had wanted to be really edgy, or provocative, Martin Patriquin would have stated that it is the federalists in Quebec that are the corrupt politicians in Quebec.

For understandable reasons, people in English Canada (specifically Ontario, Toronto) want to keep Canada together. In crude terms, they pay people in Quebec to stay in the Confederation. Why do these people in Ontario do this? (Because if Canada didn't exist, Ontario would be another Michigan and Toronto would be another Detroit.)

To make/pay people to do something that they wouldn't normally do requires large sums. There's alot of corruption involved.

Please don't say that I am shifting the debate from Quebec to Canada.

Quebec is no more corrupt than Norway, Belgium or Oregon. So-called federalists in Quebec are corrupt, because of how English Canada deals with Quebec.

----

In specific terms (and I realize that I am posting to English Canadians), who has been accused of corruption in Quebec? Charest, Chretien, Mulroney, Tremblay - all federalists.

What did Parizeau or Landry do? Did they take money?

Have you forgotten the massive ballot fraud in the last referendum?A very serious offence if you ask me but I don't recall even a slap on the wrist for the offenders.

And quite frankly,there are very few true federalists in Quebec.Most Quebecer's are fair-weather Canadians at best,as in "we want more!".

[Smallc]

And quite frankly,there are very few true federalists in Quebec.

Proof is very important when you make assertions. From what I understand, about 60% of Quebecers are federalists.

[Jack Weber]

And quite frankly,there are very few true federalists in Quebec.Most Quebecer's are fair-weather Canadians at best,as in "we want more!".

The very same erroneous statement could be said for our friends in Alberta...

There are serperatist movements all over the place...As a percentage of the greater population of any region where this might be possible,I think it's fairly small....

Edited September 26, 2010 by Jack Weber

[RNG]

The very same erroneous statement could be said for our friends in Alberta...

There are serperatist movements all over the place...As a percentage of the greater population of any region where this might be possible,I think it's fairly small....

The significant difference being that in Alberta, rather than saying "we want more", we say "we want less of ours to be stolen".

[Jack Weber]

The significant difference being that in Alberta, rather than saying "we want more", we say "we want less of ours to be stolen".

BS...

It's more like we know at one time we were a drain on Eastern Canada because we were a rural dust bowl,but now that we've won the lucky geological lottery AND we just really distrust those "Eastern Bastards",we don't want to share anything with them and want to keep it all for ourselves...

Albertan "freedom" and "libertarianism" is just other words for selfishness...

[ReeferMadness]

The very same erroneous statement could be said for our friends in Alberta...

There are serperatist movements all over the place...As a percentage of the greater population of any region where this might be possible,I think it's fairly small....

Excellent point. There are active movements in many provinces consisting of people whose attachment to the country is much weaker than the attachment to their province. The movement is bigger in Quebec because the organizers were much more successful in tapping into a sense of resentment.

[ReeferMadness]

The significant difference being that in Alberta, rather than saying "we want more", we say "we want less of ours to be stolen".

Yeah, that oil is going to last forever.

[RNG]

BS...

It's more like we know at one time we were a drain on Eastern Canada because we were a rural dust bowl,but now that we've won the lucky geological lottery AND we just really distrust those "Eastern Bastards",we don't want to share anything with them and want to keep it all for ourselves...

Albertan "freedom" and "libertarianism" is just other words for selfishness...

When we were "just a rural dust bowl" we had to buy inferior Ontario built tractors at a rediculous price because the Ontario dominated parliament put punitive duties on US tractors, and we had to sell our grain to Ontario at government mandated prices. Sort of like what Trudeau did to oil. So check your facts.

[Alta4ever]

The significant difference being that in Alberta, rather than saying "we want more", we say "we want less of ours to be stolen".

Don't waste your time with Jack, the ignore function is the best option when it comes to weber, he doesn't understand much of anything that goes on out side of ontario. He will do nothing but insult you while adding nothing to the debate.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Alta4ever

[ironstone]

Proof is very important when you make assertions. From what I understand, about 60% of Quebecers are federalists.

So that would make the remaining 40% or so of Quebecers......?Pretty significant number don't you think?

Was the act of rather widespread ballot fraud a corrupt act or not?

[Smallc]

So that would make the remaining 40% or so of Quebecers......?Pretty significant number don't you think?

Was the act of rather widespread ballot fraud a corrupt act or not?

Some of them are separatists. Some of them are sovereingtists. Some of them are nationalists. Some of them are soft nationalists. Some of them are wishy washy. Some of them just don't care. Some of them are stupid. It isn't really that big of a number when you consider all of that.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Smallc

[Argus]

Some of them are separatists. Some of them are sovereingtists. Some of them are nationalists. Some of them are soft nationalists. Some of them are wishy washy. Some of them just don't care. Some of them are stupid. It isn't really that big of a number when you consider all of that.

I work in Ottawa. I know and have known a ton of Quebecers. I have never met one - other than anglos - who would not have been glad to have Quebec separate if they thought that it could be done without them going bankrupt, and if they thought it wouldn't cost them their jobs (most of them are federal public service workers). I suppose there are Quebecers who care more for Canada than for Quebec, but I have never met one.

[Smallc]

I work in Ottawa. I know and have known a ton of Quebecers.

Oh, well

I have never met one - other than anglos - who would not have been glad to have Quebec separate if they thought that it could be done without them going bankrupt, and if they thought it wouldn't cost them their jobs (most of them are federal public service workers).

And of course this is all the evidence I'll need....