Quebec: A Nation

[Black Dog]

Correct. Let's cut them off and help ourselves out. Alberta and Ontario could be a good team, if they accepted their difference and lost their selfish pride.

"Screw the rest we'll take the best?"

Acknowledgment of Quebec's individuality is taking Trudeauism to an extreme, despite Mr. Trudeau's likely opposition to what Harper has said. This 'cultural mosiac' is about the biggest failure, it's created fractured communites and cities and tension between groups. Creating a defined cultural mosiac on the largest scale yet is surely to be met with the same apprehension and tension as the 'defined' Lebanese or Muslim communties, for example, within some Canadian cities

I'm confused, geoffery. On the one hand, you seem to be saying that there's no basis for Quebec's "special status". Yet at the same time, you seem to be arguing for similar recognition for Alberta. Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying, but those two seem to contradict one another. Maybe you're jsut saying "if Quebec gets it, we should to". But that doesn't seem to be a particularily principled stand.

Also, could you expand a bit on what makes Alberta culturally distinct from the ROC?

[MightyAC]

I wonder why this motion has been pushed to the point of a vote so quickly? Anyone know if this is a free vote for the Conservatives?

I am willing to bet that the vast majority of ridings held by Con MPs would not support the motion to call Quebec a "nation within Canada". I am damn near positive that all 28 Alberta ridings would oppose it.

I am also fairly sure that despite the lightning quick vote many constituents have actually told their MPs that they do not support this motion through emails, phone calls, etc. I wonder how many Conservative MPs will seek out the wishes of their ridings and vote against the bill? Now that Garth has been ousted I'm guessing 0.

Garth happend to have a town hall meeting with his constituents scheduled this week, and those that attended were opposed to this motion by about 30 to 1.

[normanchateau]

I wonder why this motion has been pushed to the point of a vote so quickly? Anyone know if this is a free vote for the Conservatives?

I am willing to bet that the vast majority of ridings held by Con MPs would not support the motion to call Quebec a "nation within Canada". I am damn near positive that all 28 Alberta ridings would oppose it.

I am also fairly sure that despite the lightning quick vote many constituents have actually told their MPs that they do not support this motion through emails, phone calls, etc. I wonder how many Conservative MPs will seek out the wishes of their ridings and vote against the bill? Now that Garth has been ousted I'm guessing 0.

Garth happend to have a town hall meeting with his constituents scheduled this week, and those that attended were opposed to this motion by about 30 to 1.

Today Gilles Duceppe and the Bloc announced that they support Harper's motion. So does Boisclair, leader of the PQ. It remains to be seen who'll have the last laugh. In the long run, I don't see how this will benefit Harper. Does he actually think separatists will now vote for him?

[August1991]

Harper has done some thing very good for the country. Since he has also shown his generosity, shrewdness, finesse and deep understanding of the country, he has also upset alot of people - notably federal Liberals and hardcore separatists.

Paul Wells has posted the text of Harper's press conference in Montreal today. Some highlights:

This is the third position by the Bloc in three days. (LAUGHTER) They proposed a motion. They made an amendment to their motion, and now they’re supporting our motion, but I must tell you that the responsibility of the Prime Minister of Canada, the primary responsibility is Canadian unity. If I can have the support of even the Bloc when it comes to Canada’s unity, I’m pleased. (LAUGHTER, APPLAUSE)

[That's true. The BQ proposed a motion that made no reference to "within a united Canada". Then, the BQ proposed the wording "currently within Canada" and finally the BQ has now accepted to support the Tory motion. Gilles Duceppe looks like Wily E. Coyote in Quebec now.]

It’s important to understand the nature of this motion. In a way I have to give the credit to the Bloc québécois, which asked Canada’s Parliament to take a position on les Québécois. They asked for recognition, and now there will be recognition. It’s simple. This isn’t a constitutional amendment. This isn’t a legal text. It’s simply a statement of recognition, and a gesture of reconciliation. And I think it’s important, I think it’s important to recognize reality. I know it’s not easy for everyone in Canada, but I think that when you talk about a nation, les Québécois and Québécoises are a group of peoples with an identity, a history, a language, a culture, and all that that means in the vocabulary and the nation. At the same time, I feel it’s important for the rest of the country to correct the unfortunate impression given during the past two decades that people were rejecting the definition of les Québécois, and rejecting les Québécois. This is not true, and it’s important, as I said, for recognition and for reconciliation, and now if the Bloc wants to keep calling for Quebec’s independence, they have to admit that it’s not a question of recognition in Canada. It’s only a question of independence, and it’s only a question of tearing Canada apart and creating an independent country. And les Québécois have rejected this, even when the sovereignists tried to…appeal to federalists and appeal to the Canadian identity with ideas of partnership association; even then, les Québécois have recognized their Canadian identity. (APPLAUSE)

This is very true. Harper is forcing the BQ/PQ to state clearly that they want independence without any strings or conditions. Harper has taken away the nationalist card the PQ/BQ often play. Harper made that point himself:

What it does is it forces the Bloc and the Parti québécois to admit that what they are arguing for is not a recognition or acceptance of Quebec or what Quebec is. Far from it; it’s simply a question of independence, of creating an independent country and les Qébécois have said repeatedly, when given a choice between Canada or breaking up Canada, they don’t want to break up Canada. That's why the separatists have to keep throwing in words like association and partnership to convince people they are not really voting for a break-up because that is not what les Québécois want.

REPORTER: Mr. Prime Minister, André Boisclair, the PQ leader, said yesterday that this will be a tool to basically fuel the fire of sovereignty. Do you think that's a valid point?

RT. HON. STEPHEN HARPER: No, I don't.... I think what this does is precisely the opposite. It puts out the door once and for all the notion that the rest of the country doesn't accept Quebec for what it is, a French-speaking society. Well, we do. We do, we're proud of it. It's inextricably linked to our history, to our status as a bilingual and a great country. And so now it's up to Mr. Boisclair and Mr. Duceppe to admit that they're not looking for recognition or for some kind of appreciation. What they're simply looking for is to break up the best country in the world. (APPLAUSE)...

I don't want to belittle Mr. Boisclair, Mr. Duceppe. You know, I know Mr. Duceppe well. I've always said I respect Mr. Duceppe. And I know, I understand, you know, why some people are sovereigntists. But this world doesn't need more countries. This world needs more countries like Canada that can reconcile different nationalities and can live peacefully and harmoniously together.

Harper has shifted the debate in Quebec and I'm not worried about the initial negative reaction in English Canada. It is curious to see the diehard English Liberals criticize this motion.

And Harper even managed to use the P-word. (Talk about co-opting the opposition):

The world needs more countries like Canada, a progressive country that…a progressive country that can unite and that can live in harmony with all the nations of the world, and that, that is important.

[Riverwind]

But this world doesn't need more countries. This world needs more countries like Canada that can reconcile different nationalities and can live peacefully and harmoniously together.

More importantly - this action demostrates that Canada is not a static entity and will evolve over time. Such a declaration would have been unheard of even 10 years ago.

[geoffrey]

Correct. Let's cut them off and help ourselves out. Alberta and Ontario could be a good team, if they accepted their difference and lost their selfish pride.

"Screw the rest we'll take the best?"

You know I was being merely sarcastic, that guy just frustrates me beyond belief. I think Canada can work cooperatively with all provinces as long as Alberta gets a fair deal. I don't think it's fair now, that needs to change. But I think 10 provinces is the best outcome, as long as it's within certain terms. I'm no idealist, I'll just takes what works best for me thanks.

Acknowledgment of Quebec's individuality is taking Trudeauism to an extreme, despite Mr. Trudeau's likely opposition to what Harper has said. This 'cultural mosiac' is about the biggest failure, it's created fractured communites and cities and tension between groups. Creating a defined cultural mosiac on the largest scale yet is surely to be met with the same apprehension and tension as the 'defined' Lebanese or Muslim communties, for example, within some Canadian cities

I'm confused, geoffery. On the one hand, you seem to be saying that there's no basis for Quebec's "special status". Yet at the same time, you seem to be arguing for similar recognition for Alberta. Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying, but those two seem to contradict one another. Maybe you're jsut saying "if Quebec gets it, we should to". But that doesn't seem to be a particularily principled stand.

Hmm I think you are misreading what I'm saying. My statements that Alberta is culturally distinct are evident of that. I don't think Alberta is so distinct that they aren't able to be part of Canada. I also don't think Quebec is so distinct that they need to be praised for their distinctness at very chance the govenrment gets.

It's not a particularly principled stand. Idealogies get you wars, conflict, grief... I'm suggesting that if people aren't willing to give Alberta special status, and most wouldn't, why Quebec? If we need to appease someone to stay here, we should just let them go. I don't think either province needs special status, but if Quebec is getting it, so should every other community in Canada... and that creates a big mess I hope everyone can see.

Also, could you expand a bit on what makes Alberta culturally distinct from the ROC?

What makes Alberta distinct? Tough to express in words. I've lived in all regions of Canada excluding BC and visit all areas regularly. The biggest difference I see would be Calgary to Toronto... more so than any two other cities, especially Montreal to Toronto (Quebec City actually would take the cake, I'll give you that, but most of Quebec? not a chance). The attitude towards government is particularly different. In Calgary, at least from my perspective, there is a major distrust of government, and a strong push to be self-reliant of both the government and everything in generally. We see this reflected in statistics that show that Albertans are the leading entrepreneurs and small-business people. That is our culture, self-enterprise, pursuit of success. In Ontario and Quebec is a completely different can of worms. With exceptions of course, it's a much more government reliant and accepting society. They want to know why the government hasn't provided them x, y and z. Albertans want to know why the government is providing x, y and z and not private business.

Two very cultures from a economic standpoint and it's very strongly reflected in their social culture too. Albertans volunteer more than other provinces, I'd likely say it's because of that distrust of government, the feeling that an NGO can do 10 times as much as a government handout. People in other provinces just ask the government to dole out money. In times of distress, Albertans look at each other, Ontarians look at the government.

That's pretty much what I can express in words. Being an Ontarian mainly that has moved out west, I can tell you life is considerably different here, much more so than my time in Quebec, though I do admit I was young when I lived in Quebec. I'm hoping to spend some time in Montreal this summer, maybe I'll be able to reflect on this better then and get back to you.

[jefferiah]

Agreed Geoffrey. Why should Quebec be given this special priviledge of being a distinct nation within a nation? Why not anybody else? If you want to be within this nation you should be part of this nation and thats it. Quebec is only as distinct as it's effort to be different and to highlight is difference, not by nature. Of course western Canada has its own culture. Are we going to have to start playing this game now of who is more a culture than anyone else?

[scribblet]

With 'nationhood' comes responsibility, maybe this means Quebec will have to start paying their own way

This article by Gloria Galloway is an impressive look at the character and quality of the man we have in 24 Sussex. What's even more impressive is that it was penned by Galloway who prior to the last campaign had shown a distinct bias against Mr. Harper.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home

When Mr. Harper's press secretary approached him about 6 p.m. on Tuesday with the Bloc motion in hand, it didn't take him long to decide on action: defining Québécois as a nation within Canada

GLORIA GALLOWAY

From Friday's Globe and Mail -- Nov. 24, 2006

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper was surprised by the Bloc Québécois motion calling for the recognition of Quebeckers as a nation. But he'd been pondering the subject for some time — at least since the question was put to him by a reporter in the province last spring.

Over the summer, the Prime Minister discussed the concept with Quebec Premier Jean Charest.

And when the Liberals waded into the quagmire after leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff supported a party motion stating that Quebec was a nation within Canada, Mr. Harper knew the issue would eventually confront the Conservatives.

So when his press secretary, Dimitris Soudas, approached him about 6 p.m. Tuesday with the Bloc motion in hand, he didn't take long to decide that action must be taken, Conservative insiders said Thursday.

“I think because of the difficulties that the Liberals have been having with this issue, he contemplated the day that he would have to articulate his own views,” Conservative Senator Marjory LeBreton said Thursday.

“He seems to be a long-range strategic thinker and I am sure in his innermost thoughts he was contemplating how he would handle the situation once he was confronted with it. But he had to sharpen the focus when he heard about the Bloc motion.”

Mr. Harper's immediate reaction was that the Bloc was trying to divide Quebeckers — and the federalist political parties.

But Conservatives said the Prime Minister believes the separatists made a historic error in asking Parliament to define the status of Quebeckers. Separatists have always said “We'll take our own destiny in our own hands and we don't need Ottawa to tell us what to do” — to Mr. Harper's mind, the Bloc motion marked the first time the separatists had indirectly admitted that Ottawa has a say in Quebec's future.

-snip-

Mr. Harper met with NDP Leader Jack Layton and Liberal Leader Bill Graham on Tuesday evening to ask if they would form a united front against the Bloc.

During the brief meeting with Mr. Layton, the NDP Leader said his party has recognized Quebec as a nation for many years. Mr. Harper left believing that the New Democrats would be onside.

Mr. Graham was less clear. Conservatives suggest that was due to the divisions within his party. Liberal sources say the meeting was simply intended as a heads-up.

“It was something to the effect of, ‘This could turn into a Gong Show, and I'm going to try to put something together,'” one Liberal said.

-snip-

Mr. Graham gave his reply in an equally moving speech. His party would support the Conservative motion, he said.

Mr. Charest, who received a copy of the motion just before it was read in the House, called to say he was delighted. Inside the House antechambers, MPs on the Liberal and Conservative side were jubilant.

Thursday morning, former prime minister Brian Mulroney, who is on vacation in Florida, called Ms. LeBreton to say how impressed he was with the media coverage.

“I said to the Prime Minister,” she said, “You can never go wrong when you do the right thing.”

[Charles Anthony]

Why should Quebec be given this special priviledge of being a distinct nation within a nation?

-- because they are distinct and they ask for it.

Why not anybody else?

-- because no other province can muster up the political power to ask for it.

Is there any "special treatment" that Quebec gets now vis-a-vis the federal government, that no other province can get?

I do not see any.

[normanchateau]

Harper has taken away the nationalist card the PQ/BQ often play.

That's merely one interpretation. Another is that he is facilitating and pandering to their nationalism which explains, at least in part, why both BQ leader Duceppe and PQ leader Boisclair now support the motion. It is a step in the direction in which they want to proceed.

[sharkman]

Agreed Geoffrey. Why should Quebec be given this special priviledge of being a distinct nation within a nation? Why not anybody else? If you want to be within this nation you should be part of this nation and thats it. Quebec is only as distinct as it's effort to be different and to highlight is difference, not by nature. Of course western Canada has its own culture. Are we going to have to start playing this game now of who is more a culture than anyone else?

It seems to me that if we can give nation status to upteen Indian bands in every province, we can do so for Quebec. Quebec has more right to nation status than that based on their numbers alone, and of course their history.

Don't forget Norman, that the Liberal leader supported this fully as well.

[normanchateau]

Don't forget Norman, that the Liberal leader supported this fully as well.

I'm not surprised. Ignatieff's idiotic "Quebec is a nation" stance was going to severely damage the Liberal leadership convention and thanks to Stephen Harper, it's now a nonissue. Harper helped Ignatieff but more significantly, he helped the Liberals to defuse the issue. And since the BQ are now voting for it, he helped them as well by putting them one step closer to their goal.

Will Harper gain votes outside of Quebec for declaring Quebecers a nation? I doubt it. Inside Quebec? Perhaps a few votes. Was it worth it? I doubt it.

[geoffrey]

Agreed Geoffrey. Why should Quebec be given this special priviledge of being a distinct nation within a nation? Why not anybody else? If you want to be within this nation you should be part of this nation and thats it. Quebec is only as distinct as it's effort to be different and to highlight is difference, not by nature. Of course western Canada has its own culture. Are we going to have to start playing this game now of who is more a culture than anyone else?

It seems to me that if we can give nation status to upteen Indian bands in every province, we can do so for Quebec. Quebec has more right to nation status than that based on their numbers alone, and of course their history.

Don't forget Norman, that the Liberal leader supported this fully as well.

Then what's the point of the CRTC, of preventing foreign competition from banks and airlines. What is the point of Canada?

If there is no uniting culture, and we are just merely a scattering of various nations, then why do we bother will all the BS?!? Let's just end it now, procede to an economic union of associated states, share defense costs and move on out.

We're sincerely wasting our time with nation building when in fact we are just building hundreds of distinct nations.

[normanchateau]

Agreed Geoffrey. Why should Quebec be given this special priviledge of being a distinct nation within a nation? Why not anybody else? If you want to be within this nation you should be part of this nation and thats it. Quebec is only as distinct as it's effort to be different and to highlight is difference, not by nature. Of course western Canada has its own culture. Are we going to have to start playing this game now of who is more a culture than anyone else?

It seems to me that if we can give nation status to upteen Indian bands in every province, we can do so for Quebec.

But when we give Quebecers this status, Quebec is one step closer to what the BQ and PQ want...separation from Canada. When we give such status to first nations, or as you call them, Indians, we're not on quite the same slippery slope of them separating from Canada.

[sharkman]

I would suggest this step satisfies many Quebecers who aren't rabid separatists, and puts a separation vote safely out of reach. And the reaction of Duceppe showed this legislation hurt his cause.

BTW Norman, when I earlier referenced the Liberal leader, I was referring to Graham, who is the current leader. IMV Harper stole their thunder and the BQ's, but the next election will tell the tale.

[normanchateau]

BTW Norman, when I earlier referenced the Liberal leader, I was referring to Graham, who is the current leader. IMV Harper stole their thunder and the BQ's, but the next election will tell the tale.

I realized you were referring to Graham. My point is that Harper helped the entire Liberal leadership convention by defusing the nationhood topic from the convention. So Harper helped the Liberals. And he helped the BQ and PQ who now support the motion as well. But I agree that the next election will tell us whether Harper also benefitted. Personally i see minimum benefit for Harper.

[Topaz]

What Harper is doing could made relations within Canada bitter. If he says Quebec is a "nation" within Canada then the The bloc will come back and say, thank you for recognizing Quebec as a nation BUT we don't want to be WITHIN Canada and so they start to become a country of their own. I don't think Harper is tough enough on this topic. He should say, Quebec is a province within Canada just like the rest of the privinces and that is how it will stay. No gray area, either you are in or you are out and if you are out then get out of parliament! There are of groups of peoples like the First Nation and the people of the Atlantic provinces, who would probably say they have a nation within Canada too.

[Rue]

Here is the way I see it. If If my wife asks me if she is fat of course I say no.

If a transvestite comes up to me and wants me to call him a woman, it doesn't bother me for one second. We both know what he really is. Who does it harm?

Too many people are portraying Quebec as a transvestite pretending to be a woman to trick the rest of innocent Canada into bed to screw them. Come on-who you kidding. You that dumb? Just check out Quebec's hands and adam's apple and stay calm.

A little perspective, sensitivity and humour is all you need when it comes to Quebec or any other aging transvestite. No more. No less.

Come on you have to laugh at how fast Gilles Duceppes has changed his dresses in the last four days.

More to the point, you don't see Harper going home with Gilles at night. He still prefers Belinda. Relax.

[Fortunata]

As far as I'm concerned, Harper doesn't have a mandate to declare Quebec a nation. He didn't campaign on it; if he did we might not be hailing Harper now. Something like this should be decided by referendum; one citizen, one vote. MP's are fine and dandy but they vote along party lines on issues, unlike the responsible John Q. Public.

[jdobbin]

Duceppe says Harper played into his hands.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

[normanchateau]

"The establishment came down with a constitutional package which they put to a national referendum. The package included distinct society status for Quebec and some other changes, including some that would just horrify you, putting universal Medicare in our constitution, and feminist rights, and a whole bunch of other things."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper, then vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition, in a June 1997 Montreal meeting of the Council for National Policy, a right-wing American think tank.

Odd that he had a problem with Quebec as a distinct society but not as a nation.

[August1991]

Odd that he had a problem with Quebec as a distinct society but not as a nation.

Harper is now proposing a resolution of the Commons (not a Constitutional amendment) that states the Quebecois (not Quebec) are a nation within a united Canada. That's it, that's all.

There's a big difference between what Mulroney tried to do and what Harper is now doing.

Anyway, I'm sure Harper's thinking has changed on this issue - everyone else seems to have changed their mind.

For myself, Quebec is not a province like the others. I'm inclined to believe that Canada would work better as a country if someone could figure out how to state that in the Constitution in such a way that others don't think Quebec is getting a special deal.

I gave the flippant example above of left-handed people. They're not like right-handed people. They're different. Their scissors are different, for example. Why is this such a big deal in English-Canada?

[blueblood]

Odd that he had a problem with Quebec as a distinct society but not as a nation.

Harper is now proposing a resolution of the Commons (not a Constitutional amendment) that states the Quebecois (not Quebec) are a nation within a united Canada. That's it, that's all.

There's a big difference between what Mulroney tried to do and what Harper is now doing.

Anyway, I'm sure Harper's thinking has changed on this issue - everyone else seems to have changed their mind.

For myself, Quebec is not a province like the others. I'm inclined to believe that Canada would work better as a country if someone could figure out how to state that in the Constitution in such a way that others don't think Quebec is getting a special deal.

I gave the flippant example above of left-handed people. They're not like right-handed people. They're different. Their scissors are different, for example. Why is this such a big deal in English-Canada?

I agree with you that Quebec is not province like the others. If we said that then you'd have to be fine with saying Nfld is a province unlike others, urban and rural Canada are different, western Canada is not like Eastern Canada, all of that would have to go in and on top of that No perks for anyone, and someone mentioned that in fact Quebec would in fact get some perks, what they were under meech I don't know and if someone would clarify that would be great. Personally I think the constitution should be tore up and we should go back to what we had before it, Canada was fine enough then.

[jdobbin]

I gave the flippant example above of left-handed people. They're not like right-handed people. They're different. Their scissors are different, for example. Why is this such a big deal in English-Canada?

The fear in the west is that everyone will have to learn how to use left handed scissors to get a job and that left handed people will have to be hired even in areas where everyone is right handed. The fear as well is that if you recognize left handedness as distinct that the left handed people will want to ensure more rights for themselves to the detriment of right handed people. Also, the left handed people might want to break up the family simply because they think no one understands their left handedness.

[blueblood]

I gave the flippant example above of left-handed people. They're not like right-handed people. They're different. Their scissors are different, for example. Why is this such a big deal in English-Canada?

The fear in the west is that everyone will have to learn how to use left handed scissors to get a job and that left handed people will have to be hired even in areas where everyone is right handed. The fear as well is that if you recognize left handedness as distinct that the left handed people will want to ensure more rights for themselves to the detriment of right handed people. Also, the left handed people might want to break up the family simply because they think no one understands their left handedness.

You forgot that if you use right handed scissors in Quebec where everyone is left handed, the crap hits the fan