Government Reform

[jay74]

So what are you saying. That Quebec be recognized as a nation and not a seperate country? I am a little fuzzy on this.

[Bakunin]

there is a lot of quebecer that already consider themselve as a nation. i consider quebec as a nation. Officially we are not but quebec city is called the "national capital" and the 24th of june we celebrate the "fête national" the quebec provincial government is working at the "assemblée national" its our name for the provincial house of common. the major provincial party in quebec already agreed that quebec formed a nation, even the federalist party agreed. last june 24th, paul martin , jack layton and even stephen harper agreed that quebec formed a nation... but last years, the conservative and liberal voted against a motion to make it official :/.

But i still think we are part of the canadian nation, but we (french) have difficulty sometime to see ourself has part of the canadian nation. Monarchy can be a sample of that. The english quebecers have less difficulty to see themselve part of the canadian nation.

That Quebec be recognized as a nation and not a seperate country? I am a little fuzzy on this.

i don't really care if its not recognized as a nation officially but i think it should. In the 1990's some people wanted us to be call distinct society, well i call this a distinct nation, i think its more precise.

[jay74]

A nation within a nation. I do not disagree with it but, I do forsee the huge problems, massive problems. I see why they never followed through with the motion. Try to explain that to ROC. They just would not accept something like that. In my opinion, if Canada continues to keep this system of gov't, Quebec as a nation within Canada just cannot work. It could work in a republic system maybe.

[August1991]

The crown hasn't had any real power since 1837.

Byng-King in 1926? But OK, you are basically right.

The problem isn't with the monarchy.

The problem resides in the area of symbolism, and respect. It's about "face" and "dissing".

Officially we are not but quebec city is called the "national capital" and the 24th of june we celebrate the "fête national" the quebec provincial government is working at the "assemblée national"

The term "National Assembly" dates from the 1960s. Landry was big on putting "national" after everything. (If you keep repeating something, maybe it will become true.)

Its just like if the french of france ad to have hitler's symbole on their money... or the iraq people having a bush face on their money.

That one had me in giggles...

Bakunin! There would be no such thing as a French speaking Canadian now if it were not for the monarchical system. If you are so concerned about your French heritage then express your gratitude for your saviour.

For heaven's sakes, eureka, go into the corner for a day or two and read your Canadian history. (May I suggest?) Find out why French-Canadians stopped voting for the Conservative party. Find out why there was a violent revolt in Lower Canada in 1837 but only a drunken brawl in Upper Canada. What was Regulation 17? Who was Clifford Sifton? What was the deportation? How many boats travelled between France and Canada between 1760 and 1850?

If there are still French speaking people in North America, there is only one reason. Starting from about 1800 until about 1950, each French speaking woman gave birth to about 20 kids and then raised them as best she could with the help of her husband.

Why that happened is a question for historians, but please don't repeat nonsense about the monarchy.

Bakunin, I think you are an unwitting xenophobe. You appear to have been conditioned by an education system that still teaches revenge for imagined slights.

Respect people more, and don't blame their contrary opinions on "brain-washing".

Just like adult often can't deal separation of their couple.

Bakunin, I have never like that comparison. You cannot resume millions of people into one person.

So what are you saying. That Quebec be recognized as a nation and not a seperate country? I am a little fuzzy on this.

Quebec is aready a "distinct nation" in the cultural sense.

I think quebec already form its own nation , if your talking about forming its own country then, i would let them, i would work with them but im aslo considering to possibility to improve canada. I think there is a less painfull way to work the issue than separating.

I would agree, but I'll be damned if I know what it would be or even how it could be done. Any ideas Bakunin?

A nation within a nation. I do not disagree with it but, I do forsee the huge problems, massive problems. I see why they never followed through with the motion. Try to explain that to ROC.

The Soviets called it an "autonomous republic". Mulroney and Bourassa called it a "distinct society". Levesque called it "sovereignty-association". Stanfield called it "deux nations". The technical term now I guess is assymetrical federalism.

We have it now because the BNA Act made for its provision. For example, Quebec has its own CPP (RRQ), its own immigration policies and is one of only three provinces where English and French can be used equally in courts.

[g_bambino]

jay74:Constitutional Monarchy v Republic

Definitely constitutional monarchy. Its a far better system where the head of state remains impartial and out of the political arena. A republic means a politician president, and Canada definitely does not need another high powered politician in Ottawa.

Bakunin:As for british monarchy.

The British monarchy has nothing to do with Canada any more.

The 1931 Statute of Westminster seperated the one British Crown over its dominions into distinct crowns for each country. So, though Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Belize, etc., share the same woman as queen, she acts distinctly as Queen of Canada for Canadian affairs, distinctly as Queen of the UK for British affairs, Queen of Australia for Australian affairs, and so on.

If you want to talk against constitutional monarchy in Canada you will have to speak only of the Canadian monarchy.

Bakunin:its clearly an english canadian things.

Well, actually, no. Its not.

Elizabeth II is as much Queen of Canada for francophones as she is for anglophones. As sovereign of the Canadian Crown (and even Quebec Crown) she is the public servant and representative of all Canadians regardless of their race, religion, economic status, political views, or language.

You will never hear her identify herself with only anglophones, but with all Canadians.

eureka:There would be no such thing as a French speaking Canadian now if it were not for the monarchical system. If you are so concerned about your French heritage then express your gratitude for your saviour. The churlish behaviour of Francophone Quebeckers towards the Monarchy and the heritage of both cultures shows only ignorance of self and bad manners towards the centre of another culture (if you insist on thinking it is not a large part of yours).

I'm not sure I'd use the word 'saviour', but otherwise this is absolutely correct.

The then British Crown protected French Canada during the U.S. invasions. Indeed, French Canada chose to stay under the British Crown during the U.S. revolution, even though France backed it. The Crown protected their civil law, Catholic church, and language. I somehow doubt North American French culture would have been so protected under Washington's rule.

Its amazing how Quebec politicians have twisted the past to suit thier nationalistic goals, coveniently omitting many facts, and overplaying others.

Bakunin:On that i absolutly disagree with you. I am not going to feel infrerior to any society, race or nation. I live as a free man and if someone want to force me into something i have the right to fight back. I wont kiss english feet for their failure of our assimilation just like you dont kiss french feet because they didn't assimilate england or english territory when they conquered them. I am born a free man and im a democrate and i beleive in equality of human being.

I don't believe anyone was asking you to kiss feet or feel inferior. I think the main issue is that you have chosen to forget certain protections the British Crown offered your ancestors, and have believed the xenophobic, anti-anglo hype of Quebec sovereigntists.

Bakunin:British monarchy is part of the english history, In french its a part of our history that is quite sad. Its more like an insult than a symbole. Its certainly not helping quebecers to be part of the canadian culture. Its just like if the french of france ad to have hitler's symbole on their money... or the iraq people having a bush face on their money.

The Canadian Crown has its roots in the British Crown, but that does not make it solely a part of english history. The province of Quebec existed, actually was formed, under the British Crown as much as the rest of Canada up until 1931.

Comparing the Crown to Hitler is ludicrous! I don't remember Queen Victoria ordering francophones be gassed and burned in ovens. And, you may as well then argue for the abolishment of the Catholic church because it opressed and assimilated Native Peoples in Canada. Or better yet, fight for the dissolution of the Parti Quebecois which promotes pure laine, fracno purity by squashing other cultures in Quebec.

But, no. You choose to ignore the good that came to Quebec under the British and Canadian Crown, and play up the mistakes to further enforce your percieved Quebec victimization.

I mean, why realise the British conquered Quebec not to erradicate french culture, but simply to obtain more territory, regardless of what culture people there held? Why acknowledge that if the French had been more successful in battles they would have done the same thing? Why realise that most French territory was not invaded, but given away with the Treaty of Paris? Why remember the Quebec Act which legally accepted the French Catholic Church, granted a dual judiciary system (English criminal law; French civil law) and allowed the French to keep their language and social institutions? Why admit that confederation provided distinct powers to the provinces to maintain cultural, economic and political features?

No, we must be blinkered and focus only on the Acadian deportations, Clifford Sifton, and the uprisings of the 1830s.

Looking back from today's perspective, there were indeed some deplorable times. But, the equation cannot be so one sided, and the good must be looked at as well. Overall I think you'll find that under the British and then Canadian Crown, francophone Canadians have lived with more benefit than loss.

eureka:The most successful democracies are all constitutional monarchies in a Parliamentary system, so, unless someone can devise a better system then I suggest that we should not be seduced by the power lust of local politicians.

Absolutely.

August1991:I'll never forget travelling with a delegation to southern Ontario. We arrived in Brockville during something called "Loyalist Days". The Quebecers couldn't stop laughing

That's pretty ignorant. Do people laugh at St. Jean Baptiste celebrations? Or laugh at a Ukranian festival? Just because these people are celebrating their British/Canadian past its somehow ok to laugh?

You've just revealed the bigotry some Quebecois hold while simultaneously crying that they are the victims of bigotry themselves.

[takeanumber]

Yeh, Quebecois are just like anglos...there are good people and bad people in both.

Anglos CAN in fact be very proud of their heritage. If a few Quebeckers want to make fun of that by saying 'what heritage', that just makes them all the more ignorant of the country their living in.

But whatever.

These problems date back centuries.

-------------

Fix the interface between the public and parties, and between parties and the leader.

We're stuck with a McDonalist system that doesn't work anymore.

[August1991]

That's pretty ignorant. Do people laugh at St. Jean Baptiste celebrations? Or laugh at a Ukranian festival? Just because these people are celebrating their British/Canadian past its somehow ok to laugh?

You've just revealed the bigotry some Quebecois hold while simultaneously crying that they are the victims of bigotry themselves.

To my knowledge, no one in Quebec celebrates France, any symbol of France or any member alive or dead of any French Royal family.

In Brockville, people were declaring "loyalty" to a woman in a foreign land. Rather than declare sedition, Quebecers laughed. (It was good fun. Honest... Like Brittany Spears signing CDs at an HMV.)

True, there is the bust of Louis XIV in the Place Royale in Quebec City but that is a reconstruction. The fleur-de-lys, admittedly a one time symbol of the French monarchy, only became a symbol of Quebec about 50 years ago. Most modern Quebecers are surprised to learn it is on the walls of Versailles. For them, it is Quebec.

Quebecers were the first Canadians. They discovered this continent leaving names from Detroit to Portage, St-Louis to Sioux. I am not a nationalist.

Its amazing how Quebec politicians have twisted the past to suit thier nationalistic goals, coveniently omitting many facts, and overplaying others.

To each his own viewpoint, but the sky is blue for all.

I mean, why realise the British conquered Quebec not to erradicate french culture, but simply to obtain more territory, regardless of what culture people there held?

There was a deliberate, intended effort to eradicate French-speaking people from this continent. It didn't succeed. True, the past is the past. I agree. Like Nelson Mandela, let's move on. But let us not be fools about our history or who we are or where we live. Have you ever got lost in during a canoe trip?

[August1991]

Quebecers were the first Canadians.

That's wrong. My error.

But the question is not who was here first. In my mind, the question should be who accepts best the freedom of this New Land.

[Big Blue Machine]

We should ban all seperatist parties

[Bro]

. Should our current system of gov't in Canada be reformed? If so, what should be done?

Yes indeed,stop voting in liberal idiots like ms.parrish.

Stop spoon feeding quebec.Stop replacing our moral ,political,and christian values with those of the politically correct voters of the liberal party.They justify all their actions by claiming the majority of Canadians support them,but as far as I can recall,they have never had more than a 36% total vote.That is hardly a platform to change our way of life to suit their personal agendas.

When will Canada wake up and feel the the rug being pulled beneath them by the liberal party of Canada.

[Bakunin]

We should ban all seperatist parties

We can't ban parties, weither we are a democracy or we are a monocracy. Especially when people vote at high percentage like 49% for those party.

Tell me why we souldnt be allowed to live in a democracy ?

The funiest thing is after some people here tell me im brainwashed.... They call me xenopobe and anti-anglo...

[caesar]

The gst has nothing to do with free trade. The dummies who voted for free trade thought that meant they would be able to go to the USA and bring stuff back without paying at the border. They didn't get the real picture. Cretiens won in a landslide by promising to get rid of the gst. The conservatives were nearly history.

[Big Blue Machine]

but Creteins didn't get rid of the GST, did they? All they did, just lower it a bit.