Is Quebec Corrupt?

[ironstone]

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.

This is an extreme case of sugar coating something if ever there was one.What is the reason for the existance of the Parti Quebecois and the Bloc?Why is there significant support for these parties?In case you have forgotten,there have been two votes on seceding from Canada,there will be more until they get the answer they want.

I don't know whether the separatists are stupid or brilliant,given the fact that Quebec always recieves so much more financially than what it contributes to Canada.

Most politicians from all sides have a sense of entitlement(hello David Dingwall)but in Quebec it seems they do it in a certain way.You know,the envelopes full of cash under the table kind of stuff,like the Liberal Sponsorship program for example.

[Smallc]

This is an extreme case of sugar coating something if ever there was one.What is the reason for the existance of the Parti Quebecois and the Bloc?

Do you think that everyone that votes for those two parties is a separatist? Because if you do, you're definitely wrong.

In case you have forgotten,there have been two votes on seceding from Canada,there will be more until they get the answer they want.

So how have those votes gone so far? Any vote going forward will be far more difficult for the separatists, given the existence of the Clarity Act.

I don't know whether the separatists are stupid or brilliant,given the fact that Quebec always recieves so much more financially than what it contributes to Canada.

That's because they're a have not province. Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island all receive more per capita than Quebec.

Most politicians from all sides have a sense of entitlement(hello David Dingwall)but in Quebec it seems they do it in a certain way.You know,the envelopes full of cash under the table kind of stuff,like the Liberal Sponsorship program for example.

Is there a point to the above?

[RNG]

if they thought that it could be done without them going bankrupt,

And here it is, the true story. They have been stealing from us for the recorded history of Canada. I really want another referendum. I'm retired, on a fixed income, but on my own dime I'll travel there to campaign in favor of separation.

[August1991]

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.

Active movements? (I'll leave aside your reference to Quebec.)

In my federalist moments, I have always felt that Canada works best when people are not forced to choose between their region, and the federal government. A wise federal politician avoids provoking such choices.

Edited September 28, 2010 by August1991

[ReeferMadness]

Active movements? (I'll leave aside your reference to Quebec.)

In my federalist moments, I have always felt that Canada works best when people are not forced to choose between their region, and the federal government. A wise federal politician avoids provoking such choices.

Oh, please. It's not the federal politicians who provoke the choices. It's the separatist politicians who keep feeding you guys the "Quebec has been humiliated" line. And you keep lapping it up. Oh, woe is you.

[Jack Weber]

Active movements? (I'll leave aside your reference to Quebec.)

In my federalist moments, I have always felt that Canada works best when people are not forced to choose between their region, and the federal government. A wise federal politician avoids provoking such choices.

Canadian words to live by...

I wonder if Mr.Harper believes this?

[August1991]

Oh, please. It's not the federal politicians who provoke the choices. It's the separatist politicians who keep feeding you guys the "Quebec has been humiliated" line. And you keep lapping it up. Oh, woe is you.

Look what I get for my open mind.

----

RM, if you read the OP, you would understand that it is apparently the federalist politicians in Quebec who are corrupt, who take money. They are the problem.

No one accused René Lévesque, Jacques Parizeau, Bernard Landry - to name a few - of taking any money in enevelopes. People may have accused them of many other things, but in general, their governments were clean. At most, the husband of Pauline Marois has been involved in real estate re-zoning.

OTOH, the sponsorship scandal was entirely centred on the federal Liberal Party, all federalists. Mulroney? Same story. Gérald Tremblay? An ex-Liberal cabinet minister re-elected mayor in Montreal because of federalists in Montreal.

Corruption in Quebec is largely about federalist Quebecers. Draw your own conclusion.

----

True, there have been some honest federalists in Quebec. Claude Ryan, for example. But such Quebecers are usually denigrated or misunderstood in English Canada, and French Canada.

Trudeau is another example but on this point, I have always thought of his advice to his sons: (I paraphrase) "Politics is an ugly business. Don't get involved in it."

Edited September 28, 2010 by August1991

[ReeferMadness]

Look what I get for my open mind.

You think you have an open mind? Fine - show us.

RM, if you read the OP, you would understand that it is apparently the federalist politicians in Quebec who are corrupt, who take money. They are the problem.

I believe that you believe they are the problem. But were the separatists clean or just too smart to get caught?

[RNG]

And that James Cross's killer got a walk just sucks.

[August1991]

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.

No, Ontario wouldn't collapse.

Without Canada, Ontario would become Michigan or Ohio, and Toronto would be Detroit or Cleveland. They would be places on the map, in the north of North America.

Edited September 28, 2010 by August1991

[RNG]

And that James Cross's killer got a walk just sucks.

Bump.

[seabee]

And that James Cross's killer got a walk just sucks.

James Richard Cross is still alive and underment no physocal mistreateatment from the FLQ.

What is your point anyway.

[Wild Bill]

Bump.

I think you meant to say Pierre Laporte.

Doesn't change your point, though.

[dizzy]

Oh, please. It's not the federal politicians who provoke the choices. It's the separatist politicians who keep feeding you guys the "Quebec has been humiliated" line. And you keep lapping it up. Oh, woe is you.

Sovereigntist politicians are not the catalysts of québec nationalism, they are a reflection of it. Remember, like the rest of canada, québec is a liberal democratic entity.

While federalists and unionists seem to be the main players in corruption here, I suspect this has more to do with access to power and less their political leanings.

Edited September 30, 2010 by dizzy

[dizzy]

No, Ontario wouldn't collapse.

Without Canada, Ontario would become Michigan or Ohio, and Toronto would be Detroit or Cleveland. They would be places on the map, in the north of North America.

Hmm. As a torontonian living in québec, I'm often confronted by the two solitudes and, while I have some sympathy for both perspectives, I don't have a lot of tolerance for either. Comments like this are evidence that the ignorance and distrust rolls both ways.

That said, I do agree that Ontario is largely absent of a nationalist identity. But I consider this one of its strengths. It's why toronto is such a natural home for voices as varied as Rohinton Mistry, Michael Ondaatje, K'naan, Atom Egoyan, Jane Jacobs (RIP), etc. and events like Caribana and TIFF. It's an interesting challenge to be a good home for the global diaspora and to give it such a solid platform from which to articulate.

[PIK]

I think you meant to say Pierre Laporte.

Doesn't change your point, though.

And trudeau if I remember ,was ignoring the whole FLQ crisis till he buddy was killed.

[The_Squid]

The House of Commons censured Macleans Magizine with a unanimous vote yesterday. Well at least we know that no party believes in a free and unfettered media and ALL parties will gladly kotow to the tender sensibilities of the Quebecois.

I am willing to venture a guess that many parliamentarians who voted for this bill didn't even read the article!

Personally, I prefer the media be allowed to report corruption scandals in government (and elsewhere) without interference and bullying by the parliament of Canada.

ALL 3 major parties have ensured that I will not vote for them....

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2010/09/house-tackles-macleans.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/spector-vision/on-macleans-the-house-panders-to-quebec/article1734091/

Edited September 30, 2010 by The_Squid

[nicky10013]

The House of Commons censured Macleans Magizine with a unanimous vote yesterday. Well at least we know that no party believes in a free and unfettered media and ALL parties will gladly kotow to the tender sensibilities of the Quebecois.

I am willing to venture a guess that many parliamentarians who voted for this bill didn't even read the article!

Personally, I prefer the media be allowed to report corruption scandals in government (and elsewhere) without interference and bullying by the parliament of Canada.

ALL 3 major parties have ensured that I will not vote for them....

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2010/09/house-tackles-macleans.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/spector-vision/on-macleans-the-house-panders-to-quebec/article1734091/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/macleans-magazine-ownership-expresses-regret-over-quebec-cover/article1735380/

Even the company that prints the magazine agrees with parliament. I wonder what that says.

[The_Squid]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/macleans-magazine-ownership-expresses-regret-over-quebec-cover/article1735380/

Even the company that prints the magazine agrees with parliament. I wonder what that says.

It says the owner is as much of a spineless weasil as our MP's. He chooses not lose some customers rather than back up the integrity of Macleans regardless of the truthfullness of the article.

[RNG]

It says the owner is as much of a spineless weasil as our MP's. He chooses not lose some customers rather than back up the integrity of Macleans regardless of the truthfullness of the article.

Well said.

[Argus]

No, Ontario wouldn't collapse.

Without Canada, Ontario would become Michigan or Ohio, and Toronto would be Detroit or Cleveland. They would be places on the map, in the north of North America.

Detroit declined because its principal industry collapsed. Toronto's industry - and Ontario's - is quite varied and little of it has anything to do with Quebec, so I don't see how Quebec leaving would make a single bit of difference to it. If anything, the reduction in taxes taken from Ontario and funneled into Quebec would actually improve Ontario's economy.

Edited October 1, 2010 by Argus

[Argus]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/macleans-magazine-ownership-expresses-regret-over-quebec-cover/article1735380/

Even the company that prints the magazine agrees with parliament. I wonder what that says.

Actually, Rogers said no such thing. All it did was apologize if anyone's feelings were hurt. It said nothing about the article being wrong.

And what it says is that politicians and business entities are pretty spineless when it comes to the fear of votes or profits.

[August1991]

As a torontonian living in québec, I'm often confronted by the two solitudes and, while I have some sympathy for both perspectives, I don't have a lot of tolerance for either. Comments like this are evidence that the ignorance and distrust rolls both ways.

I suppose many older men would describe their relationships with women in a somewhat similar, patronising way.

Toronto's industry - and Ontario's - is quite varied and little of it has anything to do with Quebec, so I don't see how Quebec leaving would make a single bit of difference to it.

The economy/society of Toronto and southern Ontario exist because of the captive audience/market of the rest of Canada. Virtually all of the federal international barriers to trade or commerce, and they are myriad, benefit Toronto, or southern Ontario. Why does amazon.ca even exist?

As I say, if Canada did not exist, Ontario would be another Michigan - a place on the map.

----

I'm no defender of Jean-François Lisée but all thinking, politically-inclined English Canadians should read his text:

...

Among the Maclean’s issue’s most preposterous assertions is that Chrétien’s sponsorship scandal is a sign of Quebecers’ intrinsic black soul. Shouldn’t it be remembered that the Chrétien government was never elected by Quebecers? That was Ontario’s doing. We voted for something called the Bloc. For a long while, Chrétien’s only Quebec MPs were elected in non-francophone ridings, Chrétien himself having trouble keeping his own. When the sponsorship scandal broke, we coalesced around candidates whose slogan was “A clean party for Quebec,” and that was not the Liberals.

...

Macleans Edited October 1, 2010 by August1991

[August1991]

The House of Commons censured Macleans Magizine with a unanimous vote yesterday. Well at least we know that no party believes in a free and unfettered media and ALL parties will gladly kotow to the tender sensibilities of the Quebecois.

That motion contained a seemingly minor point that may come back to haunt the Tories, the Liberals and the NDP. Here's the wording:

“That this House, while recognizing the importance of vigorous debate on subject of public interest, expresses its profound sadness at the prejudice displayed and the stereotypes employed by Maclean’s magazine to denigrate the Quebec nation, its history and its institutions.”

Macleans

The Quebec nation?

(Gawd, I sometimes hate the sovereignty/federalist debate in Quebec.)

-----

BTW, the motion passed only because Paquette "intimidated" Andre Arthur into leaving the chamber. When Arthur suggested that he would vote against it, Paquette said that he would introduce the motion every day until it passed and asked whether Arthur would show up every day to vote it down. (Such motions, I believe, require unanimity.)

Edited October 1, 2010 by August1991

[Argus]

The economy/society of Toronto and southern Ontario exist because of the captive audience/market of the rest of Canada. Virtually all of the federal international barriers to trade or commerce, and they are myriad, benefit Toronto, or southern Ontario. Why does amazon.ca even exist?

As I say, if Canada did not exist, Ontario would be another Michigan - a place on the map.

I doubt it. Quebec is likely only a small part of their customer base, given free trade with the US, and if you think Ontario would become Michigan what do you think Quebec would become? Mississippi?