Désormais...

[August1991]

Paul Sauvé

When he became Premier (also called "Prime Minister" in Quebec), he announced radical changes in the ways Quebec would run. His resolve was conveyed in the motto he adopted: "Désormais" (from now on).

[geoffrey]

Paul Sauvé

When he became Premier (also called "Prime Minister" in Quebec), he announced radical changes in the ways Quebec would run. His resolve was conveyed in the motto he adopted: "Désormais" (from now on).

Good call, I really got that 'from now on' feel from Harpers speech (I was 15 feet from him muwaha).

Well now I have to ask you August as a Quebecker (are you primarily anglophone or francophone, out of curiosity), what you felt of Harpers last speech and if it gave you renewed hope for the Federalism movement in Quebec. Also, how do you feel about how Harper is going to perform in the eyes of Quebec media?

tml jump in if you need to as well.

[normanchateau]

Harper may find himself in the same position as Brian Mulroney. The more he pleases Quebec, the less he pleases the rest of Canada, especially the West. Eventually it was Mulroney's undoing.

Currently BC has five cabinet ministers. How many BC cabinet ministers will Harper appoint? In yesterday's election, BC elected 19 Liberal and NDP MPs, less than the number of CPC MPs. If Harper appoints less than five BC cabinet ministers while simultaneously appointing "instant" Quebec Conservative MPs, he'll lose even more seats in the West in the future.

[geoffrey]

Harper may find himself in the same position as Brian Mulroney. The more he pleases Quebec, the less he pleases the rest of Canada, especially the West. Eventually it was Mulroney's undoing.

Currently BC has five cabinet ministers. How many BC cabinet ministers will Harper appoint? In yesterday's election, BC elected 19 Liberal and NDP MPs, less than the number of CPC MPs. If Harper appoints less than five BC cabinet ministers while simultaneously appointing "instant" Quebec Conservative MPs, he'll lose even more seats in the West in the future.

There will only be probably 4 cabinet ministers from Quebec, in Maxime Bernier, Lawrence Cannon, Josee Verner and Jean-Pierre Blackburn.

You won't actually see many from Alberta, we are where the crazies are. Doubtful on Rob Anders or any of that crowd getting a cabinet spot. You'll see Jason Kenney of course and Deepak and Prentice and Rona Ambrose (who I hope gets a good spot, what a great campaigner). Ablonczy maybe.

The rest will be BC and a handful from Ontario.

[normanchateau]

There will only be probably 4 cabinet ministers from Quebec, in Maxime Bernier, Lawrence Cannon, Josee Verner and Jean-Pierre Blackburn.

You won't actually see many from Alberta, we are where the crazies are. Doubtful on Rob Anders or any of that crowd getting a cabinet spot. You'll see Jason Kenney of course and Deepak and Prentice and Rona Ambrose (who I hope gets a good spot, what a great campaigner). Ablonczy maybe.

The rest will be BC and a handful from Ontario.

"We are where the crazies are." I won't touch that one. Too easy.

And as far as your cabinet predictions are concerned, aren't you the person who on another thread predicted that the Conservatives would win a majority yesterday and that the BQ would be the official opposition?

[tml12]

Paul Sauvé

When he became Premier (also called "Prime Minister" in Quebec), he announced radical changes in the ways Quebec would run. His resolve was conveyed in the motto he adopted: "Désormais" (from now on).

Good call, I really got that 'from now on' feel from Harpers speech (I was 15 feet from him muwaha).

Well now I have to ask you August as a Quebecker (are you primarily anglophone or francophone, out of curiosity), what you felt of Harpers last speech and if it gave you renewed hope for the Federalism movement in Quebec. Also, how do you feel about how Harper is going to perform in the eyes of Quebec media?

tml jump in if you need to as well.

This result does great things for federalism in Quebec geoffrey.

Don't get me wrong...sovereignty is not dead. However, if Harper's victories in some solidly separatist regions proved anything last night, they proved that the soft nationalist vote is still wavering and could be persuaded to stay in Canada.

The result also was a blow to the Bloc, both psychologically and mentally. They picked up seats in Montreal (like Pettigrew's Foreigns Affairs seat and Frulla's Heritage seat) but they hurt in their strongest region. It proves that they cannot count on the soft nationalist vote.

Harper is in the position to re-define federalism. If he can, if he does, then we will see a major shift in Quebec politics. However, that is still a big IF. Nothing is set in stone and the sovereignty movement--especially among younger, more left-leaning francophone Quebecers--will remain strong.

[scribblet]

Well, I think we did 'good', and I liked Martin's speech, he did well.

For SNL fans http://whatelection.ytmnd.com/

I think that the CPC should push for their key policies while the opposition wants to avoid an early election, and the Liberals in particular are far in debt and facing a leadership race. They need to strike quickly and pass as much legislation as they can. This means, a free vote on SSM, scrap the gun registry, a cut to the GST, increased military spending (with an emphasis on arctic defence), and crime control.

I think that Stephen Harper has a strong talent for compromise and that this can serve him well as a minority leader, I would have liked to have seen a stronger conservative party and a stronger mandate, but even given the current minority situation. the above issues should be brought to Parliament as a minimum.

This is an opportunity to show the voters that the liberals and Martin were running nothing but a fear campaign while building their confidence and working towareds a majority next time around.

cheers

[Bakunin]

I think its clear enough that harper got the adq votes, he's even stronger than the adq has ever been, the result where similar to a provincial election between the liberal, the pq and the adq.

Im pretty much surprised though that the bloc only lost 3 deputy in total while something like 9 out of 10 conservative seats where stealed to the bloc. It means the conservative came out strong only outside montreal and in montreal the bloc came out strong.

Now, for harper, i think he doesn't have the choice but to try to do its best to bring quebec back into the federation because if he can't keep it or if he fails to be a good government, it will isolate quebec and he will lose the BQ support, their only ally as a minority government.

In other word, i think it will be funny to see how the BQ and the Conservative can work togheter when the sucess of a government would help the conservative and a failure would help the bloc , i wonder how they will react to each other, it will be interesting to see the political game.

[August1991]

Harper's choice of phrase in his speech was very deliberate.

When Maurice Duplessis died in 1959, he was replaced by Paul Sauve as leader of the Union Nationale and as PM of Quebec. Sauve had survived through the Duplessis era, and intended to reform the Union Nationale and reform Quebec. Sauve never got the chance because he died a few months after becoming UN leader and PM. In the subsequent election (in 1960), the Liberals were elected under Jean Lesage.

Harper has sent out a very clear and very strong message that he intends to resurrect the old blue coalition: a federalist party, respectful of provincial autonomy but modern and democratic and conservative.

It just might work, and if he succeeds, Harper will change Canadian politics.

[Bakunin]

Harper's choice of phrase in his speech was very deliberate.

When Maurice Duplessis died in 1959, he was replaced by Paul Sauve as leader of the Union Nationale and as PM of Quebec. Sauve had survived through the Duplessis era, and intended to reform the Union Nationale and reform Quebec. Sauve never got the chance because he died a few months after becoming UN leader and PM. In the subsequent election (in 1960), the Liberals were elected under Jean Lesage.

Harper has sent out a very clear and very strong message that he intends to resurrect the old blue coalition: a federalist party, respectful of provincial autonomy but modern and democratic and conservative.

It just might work, and if he succeeds, Harper will change Canadian politics.

So he may succeed or just die in a few month

as a minority government, evrything is possible.

[Biblio Bibuli]

I really got that 'from now on' feel from Harpers speech (I was 15 feet from him muwaha).

I wondered who the oaf was that stood up and obscured the view while the CBC cameraman was desperately trying to catch a glimpse of Preston.

Why is it not mentioned anywhere that he was there?

[normanchateau]

It just might work, and if he succeeds, Harper will change Canadian politics.

He already has changed Canadian politics. When did Canadians last elect a social conservative as Prime Minister?

[tml12]

It just might work, and if he succeeds, Harper will change Canadian politics.

He already has changed Canadian politics. When did Canadians last elect a social conservative as Prime Minister?

You clearly missed the whole point of that norman.

And what is your definition of social conservatism? I mean, I don't see Harper much more conservative socially then Chretien 5 or so years ago...

[geoffrey]

I really got that 'from now on' feel from Harpers speech (I was 15 feet from him muwaha).

I wondered who the oaf was that stood up and obscured the view while the CBC cameraman was desperately trying to catch a glimpse of Preston.

Why is it not mentioned anywhere that he was there?

I said in another thread it seemed like he was on media avoidance duty. He definately was there though, where else would a reformer be on the night his boy became PM?

[August1991]

Harper's choice of phrase in his speech was very deliberate.

When Maurice Duplessis died in 1959, he was replaced by Paul Sauve as leader of the Union Nationale and as PM of Quebec. Sauve had survived through the Duplessis era, and intended to reform the Union Nationale and reform Quebec. Sauve never got the chance because he died a few months after becoming UN leader and PM. In the subsequent election (in 1960), the Liberals were elected under Jean Lesage.

Harper has sent out a very clear and very strong message that he intends to resurrect the old blue coalition: a federalist party, respectful of provincial autonomy but modern and democratic and conservative.

It just might work, and if he succeeds, Harper will change Canadian politics.

So he may succeed or just die in a few month

as a minority government, evrything is possible.

I thought the same thing, Bakunin. When I heard Harper repeating over and over Désormais... in his speech, I thought: But Sauvé died shortly after taking power. Is that a good model?

Harper's clearly not a superstitious guy, and our politics are not Asian.

----

More seriously though, Harper may have to rely on the BQ for support in the upcoming parliament and yet the Conservatives and the BQ are going to be electoral enemies in the next election. I don't know how this is going to unfurl. If all goes well, Harper could easily gain 20 more seats at the expense of the BQ in the next election.

To do this of course, Harper will have to take concrete measures to show his respect for provincial autonomy.

Sovereignists have two achille's heals. The first is that they are a common fron of people across the political spectrum: Joseph Facal and Louise Harel are both péquistes. (Imagine Linda McQuaig and Mike Harris joining forces to create the Canada Party defending Canadian sovereignty.)

The second, and this is relevant for Harper, is that sovereignists disagree on what sovereignty is. Parizeau wanted a separate country. Bouchard and Dumont wanted a new "arrangement". The BQ (and the PQ) could both split internally depending on what was on offer. [Trudeau always argued "no appeasement; give them an inch, and they'll be back for more. The constitution is flexible enough."]

These questions are off in the future, but we now have a prime minister in Ottawa who has integrity, sophistication and a legitimacy lacking in our prime ministers for the past four decades. A new way of putting the country together is possible now.

I have to add that Harper owes alot to Mulroney for making this possible, but Harper is clearly going to go about this in a very different way.

Last night, I heard Mulroney saying that since Louis Riel, the Tories have had a tough time in Quebec. Mulroney put it back on track but he was a Quebecer running against Turner. Harper's 10 Quebec Tories shows that over a century later, amends may have been made.

I think its clear enough that harper got the adq votes, he's even stronger than the adq has ever been, the result where similar to a provincial election between the liberal, the pq and the adq.

In 1979 under Clark, six of these seats went créditiste - this time, they went Tory.

[Blackguard]

Another strange thing to think about is the fact that the CP and the Bloc are more or less issued from the same party, in Quebec. The old party of Jean Charest, who will see the results of this election as a blessing. In other words, things might just work out beter that generally expected. It could mean that the Bloc will become a federalist party, and eventually acheive it's purpose without the need for Quebec sovereignty.

With an enormous amount of goodwill on both parts, federalism might be made to work.

[tml12]

Another strange thing to think about is the fact that the CP and the Bloc are more or less issued from the same party, in Quebec. The old party of Jean Charest, who will see the results of this election as a blessing. In other words, things might just work out beter that generally expected. It could mean that the Bloc will become a federalist party, and eventually acheive it's purpose without the need for Quebec sovereignty.

With an enormous amount of goodwill on both parts, federalism might be made to work.

If Harper doesn't cross the thin line of alienating the West while appeasing soft Quebec nationalists then you may be right...

[BubberMiley]

Harper doesn't have to worry about alienating Alberta. Who are they going to vote for instead?

[seabee]

With an enormous amount of goodwill on both parts, federalism might be made to work.

There is a serious possibility that Mr. Harper is just another Mr. Mulroney in waiting. He is possibly more on a tightrope than is generally believed.

Time will tell. But he has not that much time; he must deliver not only good will but cash to Québec before the next elections in Québec, due normally about a year from now, at most in two years. If he gives too much to Québec, his Western supporters might stop supporting him.

[August1991]

I just watched Verner, Bernier and Blackburn being interviewed on Le Point, the French version of The Journal. There was a refreshing excitement of people embarking on an important journey.

All three were articulate, sensible, eloquent and reasonable. Two explained their positions against gay marriage while at the same being clear about their respect for gays, and civil unions. (Verner favours gay marriage.) Bernier is the French equivalent of Peter Mackay.

Blackburn, at the end, made an excellent point: In the recent past, people in Quebec only heard the BQ speaking about Quebec's interests. Now, there will be other people talking.

As federalists, these three are so different from Coderre or Pettigrew.

I hope they get the chance to govern, and I hope Harper keeps the communication lines open. Over the past 18 months, the Conservative Party paid Verner the salary of an MP and she sat in the caucus as if she were an MP. The journalist asked them: "How will you manage in a caucus with all those western Tories?" She answered that she has already done it, without problem.

It is very good that there are 10 going to Ottawa together, and 8 from the Quebec City region. They're not alone. And in some ways, it's better than Mulroneys large, inexperienced caucus in 1984.

[normanchateau]

It just might work, and if he succeeds, Harper will change Canadian politics.

He already has changed Canadian politics. When did Canadians last elect a social conservative as Prime Minister?

And what is your definition of social conservatism?

From Wikipedia:

"Canadian social conservatives...support...natural law, tradition and conservative family values and policies. Social conservatives believe in traditional morality and social mores and the desire to preserve these in present day society..."

Examples of Liberal bills opposed by social conservative Stephen Harper:

(1) The legislation tabled by the Liberals and supported by the NDP and BQ to decriminalize marijuana.

(2) The legislation passed by the Liberals, NDP and BQ to make gay bashing a hate crime.

(3) The legislation changing the traditional definition of marriage.

If Harper has changed his position on these issues, he's certainly not said so.