Quebec student strike

g_bambino · May 18, 2012

ALL students - red, white, green - have demanded that the government negotiate instead of criminalizing the protests.

Proof, please.

Fletch 27 · May 18, 2012

Its about "freedoms"?? How abouts the 2/3rds of the students who want the freedom to have access to education?? How about the teachers who are trying to teach? Do they not have the "freedom" to keep tires on thier transportation from being slashed? Or the "freedom" to go home and not wake up with "Scab" spray-painted on thier house?

You idea of "freedom" is waaay out in left field..

For some students, tuition costs simply are not an issue because their parents pay so to me, the fact that some students oppose the protests is irrelevant because they are not the ones affected.

However, ALL students - red, white, green - have demanded that the government negotiate instead of criminalizing the protests. ALL were represented yesterday, and I wouldn't be surprised if ALL hit the streets if this law passes.

It's an entirely new context now. Imo, Charest will succeed only in mobilizing ALL students, not in squashing protest but in re-energizing protest.

Quebec’s anti-protest legislation tramples basic rights: legal experts

On Friday, the Quebec Bar Association warned that it had “serious concerns” about the law’s constitutionality. “This bill, if adopted, is a breach to the fundamental, constitutional rights of the citizens,” the bar association president, bâtonnier Louis Masson, said in a statement.

“The scale of its restraints on fundamental freedoms isn’t justified by the objectives aimed by the government.” He was referring to the bill’s most controversial elements:

* Section 16, which says that police has to be informed eights hours ahead of the time, duration and route of any demonstration by 10 or more people or more. (Friday morning the government appeared ready to increase that number to 25.)

* Section 17, which says that organizers or even a student association taking part in the march without being its organizer, must make sure that the event complies with the parameters handed to police.

“The government is making it harder for people to organize spontaneous demonstrations. It is a limit on freedom of speech,” Mr. Masson said.

It's not about the fines. It's about the freedoms.

The government and some posters here don't get it: Student union leaders are elected spokespeople - messengers to/from students. They are not 'bosses' who can 'order' students to protest here-not-there, then-not-now, this way-not-that way.

Protesters operate independently: They don't follow 'orders' of "organizers". Criminalizing "organizers" will only ensure that there are no "organizers", and will only increase the anarchy.

jacee · May 19, 2012

Montreal tonite ...

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/molotov-cocktails-launched-rubber-bullets-fired-in-montreal-protests-following-legal-crackdown/article2437892/?service=mobile

A few people in the crowd were in fact wearing masks. However, the mask bylaw and the protest limits were not expected to be applied until Saturday.

Police said they were given the march route in advance — one of the many stipulations of the new provincial law. They were not commenting, however, on reports that their phone lines were flooded by people calling to report the route, in a unique gesture of civil disobedience.

But some participants said this was their first one. Milly Pominville, a 20-year-old junior college student, acknowledged she was nervous attending the protest after the passage of the special law.“I don’t want anything bad to happen,” she said.“But I hate Jean Charest so much. He has to go.” Ms. Pominville called the new law“stupid” and vowed to return for the marches every day from now on.

And a new group of students is radicalized by dismissive and harsh treatment of freedom of expression. Nice work Charest!

A smoke bomb, some rocks, police tear gas, noise bombs, rubber bulletsthe usual ...and a lot more public support.

Edited May 19, 2012 by jacee

dre · May 19, 2012

Valid?. What if 10% of the students show up to vote and 50% of those decide to reject the offer. A majority representing 5% of the student body is hardly a ringing endorsement and it is bad journalism not to include the percentage that voted with the results and naive for you to post the results without the percentage voted.

This is the dumbest rational Iv ever heard. A vote is not valid because some people cant be bothered to show up and vote?

August1991 · May 19, 2012

And a new group of students is radicalized by dismissive and harsh treatment of freedom of expression. Nice work Charest!

jacee, it is truly ironic to read your comment (freely expressed on the Internet) about the "harsh treatment of freedom of expression".

No one, least of all John James Charest, is forbidding anyone from expressing their opinion. What is forbidden is mob violence in public areas.

----

We live in an Internet age. There is social media. If you want to protest or disagree with authority, there are many ways to do so.

In Quebec today, people are free to express their opinion and win in the market place of ideas. They are not free to intimidate or threaten with physical violence.

A smoke bomb, some rocks, police tear gas, noise bombs, rubber bulletsthe usual ...and a lot more public support.

The smoke bombs were a BFH (big f'ing hassle). It is estimated that they cost at least $10 million. (500,000 people, one hour, $20/hour).

As someone affected by that nonsense (I walked, then took a taxi; I was late for an important meeting), I wonder if jacee lives in a parallel universe to mine: in jacee universe there is perfect insurance and actions have no consequences.

More likely, jacee lives in the sad universe of pre-market life. One individual can gain a small benefit (the "fun" of throwing a smoke bomb) while imposing horrendous costs on many others.

Edited May 19, 2012 by August1991

August1991 · May 19, 2012

This is the dumbest rational Iv ever heard. A vote is not valid because some people cant be bothered to show up and vote?

But what if the vote is held on Thursday at the end of a meeting that started at 4 pm - a meeting all about why the strike is good? And if the meeting is supposed to last for 30 minutes but instead lasts for 90 minutes? And if the strike vote is decided - after this long, boring meeting - by raising a hand in front of all?

Under such circumstances, who would have the courage to vote against?

----

We live in an Internet age. Yet, union activists are notorious in objecting to online, or even secret votes.

This is all about intimidation. Bullying.

Edited May 19, 2012 by August1991

jacee · May 19, 2012

The Canadian Federation of Students enters the conversation ...

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/05/17/4497476/a-majority-of-canadians-believe.html

OTTAWA, May 17, 2012 -- /CNW/ - Nearly 80% of Canadians believe that tuition fees should be frozen at current levels or lowered, according to a new poll conducted by Harris-Decima for the Canadian Federation of Students.

"The cost of post-secondary education is out of control," said Roxanne Dubois, National Chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students. "This poll indicates that Canadians believe in an affordable system of education that is accessible to all."

The poll reveals that even in Québec, where the government's proposal to increase tuition fees by 75% over five years is being met with a fierce student strike, 65% of respondents continue to believe tuition fees should not be increased.

I wonder why Canadian media are ignoring this media release?

My continuing concern about protests in the streets is that the actions of a few are used to criminalize all protesters.

If someone throws a rock or smoke bomb a block away from me, what the heck does that have to do with the rest of us? Why are we all suddenly 'unlawfully assembled'? We can only be responsible for our own behaviour, but we're criminalized by someone else's misbehaviour? What's up with that?

It's just an excuse to clear the streets of protesters, an excuse for the police to use their expensive bully toys paid for by the taxpayers.

Kudos to the Quebec students and supporters who stand their ground and continue to assemble to protest, defying the unjust declarations of "unlawful assembly".

bleeding heart · May 19, 2012

[/i]

My continuing concern about protests in the streets is that the actions of a few are used to criminalize all protesters.

If someone throws a rock or smoke bomb a block away from me, what the heck does that have to do with the rest of us? Why are we all suddenly 'unlawfully assembled'? We can only be responsible for our own behaviour, but we're criminalized by someone else's misbehaviour? What's up with that?

Because if anyone acts violently or in an illegal manner, it is the responsibility of the law-abiding protesters to stop them. Sure, the police remain unable or unwilling to do this, or to even separate the wheat from the chaff in their (highly politicized) rhetoric; the politicians are not expected to address the issue, except through blanket condemnations that display their contempt for democratic principles.

But the protesters must and should solve every problem in which they're even perceived to be involved.

It's quite rational, actually, within the lunatic framework of these discussions.

Edited May 19, 2012 by bleeding heart

jacee · May 20, 2012

Because if anyone acts violently or in an illegal manner, it is the responsibility of the law-abiding protesters to stop them. Sure, the police remain unable or unwilling to do this, or to even separate the wheat from the chaff in their (highly politicized) rhetoric; the politicians are not expected to address the issue, except through blanket condemnations that display their contempt for democratic principles.

But the protesters must and should solve every problem in which they're even perceived to be involved.

It's quite rational, actually, within the lunatic framework of these discussions.

Lunacy is right!

I'm supposed to stop someone who's being vandalous? What if it's a cop? :lol:

No ... it is up to the police to deal with that,

without interfering with the rest of us.

Edited May 20, 2012 by jacee

jacee · May 20, 2012

This is just disgusting.

Criminalizing thousands of protesters in half an hour?

Smells like a cop setup to me. <_<

Authorities declared the protest illegal about a half-hour after it began, but stayed hands-off for most of it. However, a little after 11 p.m. ET, Montreal police ordered protesters to disperse, then called in the provincial police force's riot squad At least seven people had been arrested by 11:30 p.m., police said, though the final tally is expected to be much higher.

Police fired tear gas at demonstrators in at least three areas of the city: near McGill University's campus, at the intersection of St. Laurent Boulevard and Ontario Street, and in a park near the Université du Québec à Montréal

Montreal police spokesman Ian Lafrenière said a "hard core" of protesters was engaging in illegal acts. A few were throwing beer bottles at constables, and a firefighting crew had to be called to a stretch of Sherbrooke Street to extinguish flames there.

Some protesters also complained of police violence. On St. Denis Street a line of riot officers charged a gathering of people and started beating a man in his 50s or 60s who was retreating, but not nimbly enough to avoid them. A demonstrator told TV cameras that an officer shoved him with a bicycle, while elsewhere riot-squad units charged at peaceful street rallies.

Estimates varied widely on the number of people in the streets, with numbers ranging from 3,000 at the beginning of the first march to 20,000 at the demonstrations' peak, when packs of protesters split up to locations around the downtown.

Why are riot cops "charging" groups of peaceful protesters?

Why are they beating on an old man who can't move fast enough!

Absolutely disgusting.

If they know they are dealing with "a hard core" of people doing illegal acts, why are they criminalizing and brutalizing thousands of peaceful protesters?

I've read some anarchist literature. It seems they are right: Poke the beast a bit and the true violence of the state against the people is released. And formerly quiescent people are mobilized against the state.

20,000 people mobilized now ...

Bring it!

Edited May 20, 2012 by jacee

August1991 · May 22, 2012

Why are riot cops "charging" groups of peaceful protesters?
Why are they beating on an old man who can't move fast enough!

Absolutely disgusting.

jacee, this is the 21st century. YWe have the Internet and you, for example, protest on this forum almost every day.

Isn't that enough?

Argus · May 22, 2012

This is just disgusting.

Criminalizing thousands of protesters in half an hour?

Smells like a cop setup to me.

The law requires you to get permission and give a planned route to police. It was illegal the moment they deviated from their announced route. And it was a deliberate and planned deviation. The leaders should all be arrested soon. Myself, I'd have started dropping pepper spray bombs and tear gas the next block, then gone in to bust as many heads and make as many arrests as possible.

That's how you deal with rabble. Send everyone you arrest out to work on farms for the summer for twelve hours a day. Maybe when they get back they'll feel more like getting back into the classroom.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Argus

Peter F · May 23, 2012

jacee, this is the 21st century. YWe have the Internet and you, for example, protest on this forum almost every day.

Isn't that enough?

Has the Quebec government changed its plans?

jacee · May 23, 2012

Has the Quebec government changed its plans?

Not yet, but the mood is shifting!

Quebec Premier Jean Charest had his moment– a pretext and a platform, as well as strong popular support, for a firm but fair crackdown on the violence and hooliganism that have wracked Quebec for weeks.

He appears to have squandered the opportunity, overplaying his hand with a vaguely worded emergency law that growing numbers of Quebecers believe was draconian and excessive.

...

Evidence of the shift in sentiment emerged through the weekend on social media feeds emanating from Quebec City and Montreal A cursory read of Bill 78 reveals its architects made a bone-headed mistake: Rather than divide the opposition, isolating thugs and vandals from the mass of protesters, the law pushes them all together, and includes measures that appear to make it illegal to even encourage the striking students, or their representatives At a stroke, Charest increased the size of his opposition.

...

No surprise, every bright young lawyer in Quebec is now volunteering to work pro bono to help challenge Bill 78 in court, echoing a denunciation by the Quebec Bar Association

Polls of ordinary Quebecers show public opinion, which has been firmly in the government camp for weeks, now breaking sharply in the other direction. A CROP poll taken Thursday evening and Friday morning, as the law was being debated in the Quebec egislature, found 66 per cent in favour and 34 per cent against. A second survey done over the weekend by Léger Marketing, after details of Bill 78 became known, showed support for the government plummeting, to 51 per cent, and student support rising, at 43 per cent.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/touch/story.html?id=6664238

It’s now official: what were once protests against tuition hikes have transformed into protests for the right to protest.

“We deplore that the government chose the path of repression rather than that of negotiation,” said Léo Bureau-Blouin, president of the association of junior colleges.

The giant protest on Tuesday made it clear police would not be able to arrest thousands of people.

Estimated 250,000 people Tues, celebrating 100 days of protest.

There are other hints the student unrest could spread outside the province. The Canadian Federation of Students wants to call an Ontario-wide strike vote this fall in a show of solidarity with Quebec students.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/massive-montreal-rally-marks-100-days-of-student-protests/article2440155/?service=mobile

... To put an end to the strike, the Liberals have to sit down and negotiate in good faith, and not like they did the last time, making an agreement then announcing in the newspapers they’ve succeeded in screwing the students.”

“For us it’s much larger than the tuition hikes— it’s a fight against the politics of austerity of this government that serves essentially to save capitalism from its current crisis. ...

Still, talking seems to be the only option left to the Charest government. And the QMI’s poll showed 76 per cent believe the government should resume negotiations.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/touch/sports/story.html?id=6662035

RE: Montreal Transit ...(STM)

I read a suggestion last week that STM management was considering NOT providing transit for students/people going to protest.

Now the drivers (union) say they are considering NOT providing transit to police. :lol:

God I love it when some reactionary autocrats who think they can control (free) people get a shot of their own medicine.

(Are you listening Argus? )

Edited May 23, 2012 by jacee

jacee · May 24, 2012

Quebec’s new protest law will be struck down by court challenge over charter violation: lawyer

Grey also called sections 18 to 20, which call for cutting off of funding and fees to student associations considered to be in violation of the law, an effective dissolution of the association.

He charged that the measures hearken back to the days of Quebec’s long-serving premier Maurice Duplessis, a period known as la grande noirceur, or the great darkness.

“Duplessis tried dissolving unions that went on strike, and that was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada even before the charter (existed),” Grey said.

I love the way Montrealers are banging pots and pans every night at 8pm in support of protesters!

The story doesn't end with a prohibitive law: That's just the beginning of larger resistance.

Edited May 24, 2012 by jacee

TimG · May 24, 2012

]Quebec’s new protest law will be struck down by court challenge over charter violation: lawyer

The lawyer needs to read the charter:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html

Fundamental freedoms

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

{a} freedom of conscience and religion;

{b} freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

{c} freedom of ***peaceful*** assembly; and

{d} freedom of association.

Peaceful assembly does NOT include the right to prevent other people from going about their business.

The antics of the spoiled brats and their hangers on is quite pathetic.

Edited May 24, 2012 by TimG

jacee · May 24, 2012

The lawyer needs to read the charter:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html

That's right. So police can deal with illegal acts, but cannot break up peaceful protests nor interfere with peaceful protesters. Criminalizing thousands of people because of the acts of a few ... won't pass a Charter challenge.

madmax · May 24, 2012

The antics of the spoiled brats and their hangers on is quite pathetic.

And then again, if its these antics that start putting tutions across the country back into perspective where students are subject to a Debt sentence after graduating then who knows...perhaps others will benefit without having to fight for it.

Even if the Students fail to achieve their goal of lower tutions, its set the tone to other students that you have to do SOMETHING (not necessarily strike) but something to get governments to put tuitions back to an affordable level.

As its well over 100days, I cannot see the Quebec government budging.

Yet I don't see a rise in the fortunes of any opposition party on this specific issue.

TimG · May 24, 2012

So police can deal with illegal acts, but cannot break up peaceful protests nor interfere with peaceful protesters.

A protest that blocks traffic or prevents others from going about their business is not peaceful.

May 24, 2012

It's NOT a student protest! It's anarchy and rioting

What REALLY pisses me off is the support from outside agencies. The Marxist Syd Ryan and other union leaders taking members money from Ontario workers and giving it to lazy rioters that haven't a cause at all!

Imagine, they whine because the tuition would be increased a paltry amount. An amount that would,with inflation, be only what it was 40 years ago!. And amount that when it reached it's max. would still be lower than any other North American tuition!.

Then there are the leftist pinko profs and their agenda.

No! and NO!it's not about student demonstration it's insurrection, riot and anarchy!

And..arresting a few...20-30-40? Not enough, arrest anyone breaking the law even if that's a thousand. Pull in busses to cart them to some holding area. Charge them and jail them and fine them.

That's what you do with criminals.

http://torydrroy.blogspot.ca/2012/05/ezra-on-quebec-rioters.html

Truncated for brevity.

What’s going on in Quebec cannot be called protests. The right word is riots.
That’s what you call it when masked vandals smash cars, break windows in banks and shops, night after night. And that’s on top of the smoke bombs thrown in the subway stations earlier this month that paralyzed the city’s transit system.

How is this any different from the Stanley Cup riot in Vancouver?

It is different, of course. It’s worse.

Vancouver’s riot was spontaneous. They weren’t backed up with official NGOs and union organizers and bank accounts and spokesmen and press releases.

The Montreal riots are a criminal industry.

But blame also apportions to the people whose duty it is to stop riots — but who haven’t.

The police, who too often stood by idly because they didn’t want the rough work of a confrontation. Even when peaceful students got a court injunction demanding they be allowed to attend class, the cops refused to enforce the injunction and clear protesters blockading school doorways.

If they found a class going on, they’d storm into the room. Flick the lights on and off. Jump on desks. Shout and scream. And even physically grab students inside, screaming and swearing at them, terrifying them.

When you wear a mask, trespass in schools, hunt down law-abiding students, then disrupt them and physically push them — they are terrified. And if you are doing so to terrorize them into not going to class, and to join your political protest, that is terrorism.

This, in the city where Marc Lepine burst into classes and shot women.

Last Thursday, four months late, Charest proposed a new response: Laws against rioting. And a delay in the school year.

Quebec doesn’t need new laws. The Criminal Code is full of them. Charest always had the tools — he was just too cowardly to use them.

But his plans to cancel the current semester, and reschedule it months from now, is shocking. That is the perfect reward for the protesters, doing what they couldn’t do on their own: Bring Quebec’s universities grinding to a halt.

Charest — not the rioters — has derailed not only students’ education, but also their plans for summer jobs.

Full article at link.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Charles Anthony
merged thread

Fletch 27 · May 24, 2012

I agree 100%... It is simply over-privilidged leftist idiots who's parents can AFFORD to keep thier little darlings out of school for an entire year and express thier "rights" to "protest" and ruin a year for the other students keeping them from a year of gainful employment.

This is simply rioting crowd of over-priviledge morons. They are NOT poor.. They are spoiled..

jacee · May 24, 2012

The lawyer needs to read the charter:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html

Peaceful assembly does NOT include the right to prevent other people from going about their business.

Where does it say that?

Protests are being held mostly in the evenings - ie after the business day.

Fletch 27 · May 24, 2012

Your aware that there is night-school for those that need to work and pay for accomodations, books, tuition, etc.etc Right? Every university has them you know... Well if you didnt, now you do..

Where does it say that?

Protests are being held mostly in the evenings - ie after the business day.

unChosen · May 24, 2012

A protest that blocks traffic or prevents others from going about their business is not peaceful.

Any protest with 200,000+ people will always prevent some people from going about their business. Unless you plan to tell me that they should all go into the wilderness where no one lives and start "protesting".