Marois, the FTQ, Arsenault, Blanchet & Stephen Harper

[August1991]

I know that putting many French names in a thread title in an English Canadian forum on politics is a red flag, both good and bad. The good? Right-handed people might understand what left-handed people have to live with. The bad? An invitation to more Quebec-bashing.

But this newspaper quote has been bothering me in the same way that some radio ads bothered Paul Wells.

Sorry, the quote is in French. (Welcome to federal Canada - another flag, this time blue.) I copy/paste at length because of its significance:

Le reportage ajoutait que la première rencontre était survenue après que le Fonds de solidarité eut accordé une aide financière à Capital BLF, une entreprise dirigée par M. Blanchet et où travaillent le frère et le fils de Mme Marois.

....

«Tous les actifs de mon mari sont effectivement en fiducie, sauf ceux de BLF, et celui-ci a demandé un avis au commissaire à la déontologie et à l'éthique qui lui a fait un avis positif. Et s'il n'a pas agi en ce sens-là, c'était une nouvelle entreprise qui avait besoin d'un peu d'expérience, mais quand viendra le temps venu, il procédera, comme pour le reste», a déclaré Mme Marois, laissant ainsi entendre que l'implication de son mari dans la société était temporaire.

Quant aux rencontres privées avec Michel Arsenault, Mme Marois a indiqué n'avoir rien à se reprocher. «Nous avons discuté de choses qui concernaient les réalités politiques du Québec et je crois que c'était raisonnable. Cela m'arrive parfois de rencontrer des gens sans avoir de gens autour de moi.»

La première ministre a d'ailleurs précisé que ce genre de rencontres, non seulement avec des dirigeants syndicaux mais aussi avec des gens d'affaires et des représentants des milieux communautaires, sont monnaie courante pour un dirigeant politique.

«Il faut continuer à se parler. Nous sommes une petite société en nombre, une grande société en termes de visions et de perspectives, mais c'est normal qu'on puisse se parler. C'est sain qu'on puisse le faire», a fait valoir Mme Marois.

«Il y a eu un tel climat de suspicion depuis quelques années - et on peut le comprendre avec tout ce qu'on entend à la commission Charbonneau. Mais on retrouve une certaine normalité, j'en suis persuadée. On est en train de nettoyer tout cela et il faut revenir à une normalité aussi, être capable de se parler.»

De son côté, Michel Arsenault a également dû aborder cette question en annonçant, dans les minutes suivantes, qu'il ne se représenterait pas à la présidence de la FTQ. Tout comme la première ministre, le leader syndical a parlé d'une rencontre qui s'inscrit dans le cours normal des choses.

«Nous sommes inscrits, la FTQ, au registre du lobby et le président de la FTQ rencontre tous les politiciens. Le seul politicien qui a refusé de me rencontrer en six ans, c'est Stephen Harper», a fait valoir M. Arsenault devant les journalistes.

La Presse, 4 November 2013

IMHO, this is an instructive article on three points:

1. The husband of the PM of Quebec is exempt from conflict rules because, well, he is.

2. According to the PM of Quebec, Quebec is a small society and anyone important invariably talks to other important people.

3. Stephen Harper refused to meet the leader of the FTQ.

Edited December 16, 2013 by August1991

[cybercoma]

I can't help but be put off by the fact that she calls herself a Prime Minister. Canada does not have 2 Prime Minister. She is a premier.

Edited December 16, 2013 by cybercoma

[bush_cheney2004]

Quebec has its own prime minister. She can call herself whatever she pleases, no ?

[August1991]

I can't help but be put off by the fact that she calls herself a Prime Minister. Canada does not have 2 Prime Minister. She is a premier.

Who cares about the title? Entirely irrelevant. In India, they are called Chief Ministers. In the US, Governors. In Germany, Minister-President. Whatever the title, the more important point is that a civilized state is based on sovereign jurisdictions.

The article linked in the OP makes plain why.

-----

A federal state is a good way to protect against dictatorship.

[cybercoma]

Who cares about the title? Well, she carries the same title as the federal head of government, so I care. It's misleading at best and being from a separatist party I wouldn't give it that much of a pass. It seems frankly seditious.

Edit: Sovereign jurisdictions or not the US doesn't call its governors presidents, nor India their chief ministers prime minister.

Edited December 16, 2013 by cybercoma

[August1991]

Who cares about the title? Well, she carries the same title as the federal head of government, so I care. It's misleading at best and being from a separatist party I wouldn't give it that much of a pass. It seems frankly seditious.

Cybercoma, we live in a federal state where provincial governments wisely protect their sovereignty.

But picking on this minor point of a title, you miss some greater issues. For example, why did Harper never meet the head of the FTQ once during six years?

[Peter F]

Who cares about the title? Well, she carries the same title as the federal head of government, so I care. It's misleading at best and being from a separatist party I wouldn't give it that much of a pass. It seems frankly seditious.

She isn't called Prime Minister, she is called Premier Minister. Premier is translated as 'First'. The correct english translation is 'First Minister'. Why the press continues to translate 'Premiere minister' as 'Prime Minister' is beyond me.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Peter F

[cybercoma]

Cybercoma, we live in a federal state where provincial governments wisely protect their sovereignty.But picking on this minor point of a title, you miss some greater issues. For example, why did Harper never meet the head of the FTQ once during six years?

I pick on this pint because thinking about it may provide answers as to why the actual Prime Minister doesn't meet with her.

[The_Squid]

She isn't called Prime Minister, she is called Premier Minister. Premier is translated as 'First'. The correct english translation is 'First Minister'. Why the press continues to translate 'Premiere minister' as 'Prime Minister' is beyond me.

So is this a translation issue, or does she actually call herself a Prime Minister?

[Rue]

I can't help but be put off by the fact that she calls herself a Prime Minister. Canada does not have 2 Prime Minister. She is a premier.

Premier and Prime Minister technically are the same in French. The phrase Premier Ministre is not necessarily used. I know in english we only use Premier for a provincial leader but in the French language it can be translated interchangeably so I am not sure that was a deliberate tactic to say she is the Prime Minister not Premier. Not sure about that. May just be one of those English to French to English things.

Now as for the rest August already knows what I am going to say.

The Parti Quebecois mandate is to do anything to encourage seperation. To do that they want to create as many imagined slights and conflicts with Ottawa as is possible. So Harper shrugs and ignores her. No oxygen no fire.

Marois in my opinion is the epitome of a cow. She likes chewing her cud. Its all she knows how to do. Chewing her cud is basically passing methane gas and repeating the same tired seperatist mantra. The hay and barn is supplied courtesy of the federal government.

She is everything I detest about certain Quebecois-inbred, close minded, bigoted, intolerant, afraid of anything that does not look or smell like her.

even the language she speaks is inbred and small town. She is an inbred bumplin who can not understand why the rest of the world does not have the same sloping forehead and web fingers she has.

Unfortunately at this time, Quebec is so bedraggled from head to toe by coruption the only people attracted to politics are bigots and criminals.

I never much liked Bouchard but he was an intelligent man. Levesque I respected. He was no bigot and he spoke eloquently in both languages and

was a passionate man. Parizeau was a fat baboon with a phony French accent and his head stuck up his own butt licking it.

Claude Ryan was just too Jesuit intellect for Quebec. Both Johnsons were pragmatic but not visionary.

Bourassa was a paranoid, closeted wierdo who had a lot of the same issues as J. Edgar Hoover he took to his grave. Then we had Mr. Charest who

lasted a relatively long time in such a corupt province before he could not distance himself from it.

It is impossible to be clean or intelligent these days in Quebec politics.

I nominate Serge Savard to take over the Liberal Party amd become the next Premier.

[Michael Hardner]

I can't help but be put off by the fact that she calls herself a Prime Minister. Canada does not have 2 Prime Minister. She is a premier.

That's standard usage, but I was taught the opposite way back when.

[Remiel]

For what reason is generalizing about people from a small town being inbred and deformed acceptable in this day and age?

[g_bambino]

I can't help but be put off by the fact that she calls herself a Prime Minister. Canada does not have 2 Prime Minister. She is a premier.

Really, 'premier' and 'prime minister' are synonyms; they both mean the chief minister of the Crown; 'first' or 'prime' in French is, of course, 'première'. If I recall correctly what I read in old history books and newspapers--from the early 20th century and older--provincial premiers used to be regularly referred to as 'prime minister'.

[August1991]

Really, 'premier' and 'prime minister' are synonyms; they both mean the chief minister of the Crown; 'first' or 'prime' in French is, of course, 'première'. If I recall correctly what I read in old history books and newspapers--from the early 20th century and older--provincial premiers used to be regularly referred to as 'prime minister'.

And here, Bambino, you and I will part ways. To me, the best guarantee of individual freedom is a federal state with sovereign members.

Monarchy is dictatorship through random chance and "constitutional monarchy" (what an oxymoron) is a naive protection of individual freedom.

IMHO, an individual's best chance to live well is in a federal state where it is possible to get rid of a government peacefully.

====

Returning to my OP, why has Harper refused to meet anyone from the FTQ? But why does Quebec's "PM" speak regularly with its head?

And what does this have to do with me, you or anyone else?

Edited December 21, 2013 by August1991

[August1991]

MM. Boyer et Cadieux annoncent également une campagne de mobilisation contre Stephen Harper et ses troupes conservatrices, disant vouloir faire «tout ce qui est possible» pour assurer que le Parti conservateur n'obtienne pas de nouveau mandat.

Le Devoir

I am, uh, not surprised.

====

BTW, as much as unions (or religions) impose costs on society, I favour unions (and religion) as an insurance policy against State despotism.

If the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany had faced independent unions (or religion), maybe world history would have been different.

Hence, when forced to choose between a singular State and religions (or unions), I tend to prefer a federal State with entrenched rights to unionize and respect religious practice. I prefer diversification.

Edited January 11, 2014 by August1991

[Guest Derek L]

Just read this:

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2014/01/20140120-071110.html

MONTREAL- Quebec separatists would have won a slim majority government had a provincial election been held this past weekend, a new poll suggests.

The Leger Marketing survey for QMI Agency indicates the Parti Quebecois' secularism charter, while repulsive to many ethnic and religious citizens, hasn't hurt the PQ among most French voters.

The party says it's prepared to put its minority government on the line over its proposal to bar public servants from wearing conspicuous religious symbols.

"This is the first time that the PQ is mathematically in position to win a majority government since their election in fall 2012," said Leger vice-president Christian Bourque.

First off, I don’t put that much stock in polls, but if the PQ does return with a Majority, could this signal a resurgence of the Bloc federally in Quebec? If so, I don’t see how this is a good thing for both the Liberals and NDP, who’s electoral fortunes start in Quebec.

[Argus]

The PQ has taken a lesson from the Natonal Socialist Party of Germany circa 1932. Find someone to focus hostile attention on and divert them from the terrible economic situation. Then promise to protect people, to protect their pure culture, from these new enemies, who are such a great danger. Promise to bring these enemies to heel. And it's working. A lot of Quebecers are delighted to find someone thinks just like them, and will put these people in their place.

[Guest Derek L]

The PQ has taken a lesson from the Natonal Socialist Party of Germany circa 1932. Find someone to focus hostile attention on and divert them from the terrible economic situation. Then promise to protect people, to protect their pure culture, from these new enemies, who are such a great danger. Promise to bring these enemies to heel. And it's working. A lot of Quebecers are delighted to find someone thinks just like them, and will put these people in their place.

I don’t know if the PQ mirrors the Nazis as much as you suggest, I don’t really bother following Quebec politics, but I can’t square the circle on how a resurgent Bloc will be anything but good for the Federal Liberals and NDP going into 2015.

[Argus]

I don’t know if the PQ mirrors the Nazis as much as you suggest, I don’t really bother following Quebec politics, but I can’t square the circle on how a resurgent Bloc will be anything but good for the Federal Liberals and NDP going into 2015.

I don't see how they help the liberals and NDP so much as help the tories. A resurgent BQ would take votes, and thus seats from them both and thus decrease the possibility either would gain enough seats to forma majority. The Conservatives, by contrast, have very little to lose in Quebec.

[Guest Derek L]

I don't see how they help the liberals and NDP so much as help the tories. A resurgent BQ would take votes, and thus seats from them both and thus decrease the possibility either would gain enough seats to forma majority. The Conservatives, by contrast, have very little to lose in Quebec.

No doubt.

[August1991]

“OK, but you know all of the projects near the Montreal region were blocked, right?” Ms. Zakaib said. “They were blocked because of competition with Accurso. I just want you to know.”

This will have an effect on the federal election in 2015 - and votes for Harper, Trudeau Jnr and Mulcair.

Edited January 24, 2014 by August1991

[cybercoma]

This will have an effect on the federal election in 2015 - and votes for Harper, Trudeau Jnr and Mulcair.

What will the effect be? I don't follow.

[August1991]

What will the effect be? I don't follow.

Do a google search on any part of the quote. (Note: The quote was a translation of an original French quote.)

In Quebec, this original quote is still hanging, waiting for an interpretation.

Edited January 25, 2014 by August1991

[August1991]

Still clueless, cybercoma? Can't follow?

What will the effect be? I don't follow.

English Wikipedia:

Claude Blanchet is a Canadian financier who served as the CEO of Quebec's Union Funds (Fonds de solidarité de la Fédération des Travailleurs du Québec) and CEO of the Société générale de financement, a government-owned holding company.
He started his financial career as the right arm of financial mogul Robert Campeau, serving in the Ottawa region. In his early 30s, Blanchet started to serve in public labour organizations.
He is married to Pauline Marois, the leader of the Parti Québécois and the Premier of Quebec.


=====

To my knowledge, in addition to never meeting anyone at the FTQ, Harper never met Desmarais.

Amazing.

Edited January 27, 2014 by August1991

[Remiel]

Why compare them to the Nazis though when their Vichy collaborators would likely be far more appropriate (and apt)?