Harper calls Quebecois motion "an historic step"

[Leafless]

I don't know, but this does not exactly sound right pertaining to Canadian nationalistic and patriotic ideologies, especially when all Canada knows about the existing Quebec conflict with other provinces over powers and linguistics.

''Nationalism does not mean separation,'' Harper said, referring to Quebec nationalism in a region which calls itself the Kingdom of the Saguenay. ''Quebecers were the first to call themselves Canadians.''

Will Harper give the same regional recognition to any OTHER province that considers itself special or does it mean Harper's speech is simply igniting constitutional TROUBLE.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...82ad726&k=20317

[mikedavid00]

I don't know, but this does not exactly sound right pertaining to Canadian nationalistic and patriotic ideologies, especially when all Canada knows about the existing Quebec conflict with other provinces over powers and linguistics.

Quebecois does indeed meet the definition of a nation. Quebec was 1 of the 2 'founding nations' of Canada.

Of course, Richmond, Surrey, Markham, Richmand Hill can now also be considered a nation within Canada.

It's natural for it to progress to this in due course and is a great way to get votes for corrupt political parties.

The only way to stop this is to give the politicians less power and leave these descisions to the people.

BTW. Our national anthem was written by a Quebecer.

[Leafless]

Quebec was 1 of the 2 'founding nations' of Canada.

Show me WHERE in Canada's constitution this is factual and official?

[Charles Anthony]

Show me WHERE in Canada's constitution this is factual and official?

Nobody needs to show you that. You know it.

Now you are just being ornery.

[mikedavid00]

Quebec was 1 of the 2 'founding nations' of Canada.

Show me WHERE in Canada's constitution this is factual and official?

It's not official. It's just common knowledge. Quebec meets the definition. Two nations of people came together to form Canada because Quebec was going to stay by itself during the formation.

Two cultures came together. Naturally the more dominant culture began to saturate the other culture, and the minority cultures had enough and faught back to protect their culutre. They have a right to their culture.

What's happening now is unfair handouts and politics being played. People have learned to use the 'french culture' card to get what they want and now we have a non functioning parlimenatry system which does NOT represent the country of Canada, rather, special intrest.

The same will happen with Islam here in Canada. It will take many more years but you will see history begin to repeat itself.

And I'll just prove that the parmlimenaty system doesn't work for modern Canada. It's broken, non democratic, and doesn't represent Canada in a national respect.

There's no answers anymore. It's beyond repair unless we have major reform to our system. We have ot move with the times. Let Quecec control all its taxes and programs. When they realize they are poor, they will get their act together and stop looking for handouts, focus less on thier culture, and get their books in order.

[kimmy]

Will Harper give the same regional recognition to any OTHER province that considers itself special or does it mean Harper's speech is simply igniting constitutional TROUBLE.

Since there doesn't seem to be any legal significance to this recognition of Quebec's distinctiveness, I would say no, there's not going to be constitutional trouble from this. There's nothing here that would require any constitutional talks. And since there are no powers or privileges arising from the motion to recognize Quebec as a nation within Canada, I can't see why other provinces would bother making a fuss.

It's like a kid walking past a school for "special kids" and saying "Mommy! Mommy! I want to be special too!" Aside from getting to wear a hockey-helmet when you play on the swings, being "special" isn't actually all that great.

-k

[mikedavid00]

It's like a kid walking past a school for "special kids" and saying "Mommy! Mommy! I want to be special too!" Aside from getting to wear a hockey-helmet when you play on the swings, being "special" isn't actually all that great.

-k

But what if these kids with the helmets get a free lunch at school, have smaller classrooms, and more personaly attention given to them? (Natives, Quebec).

Facts are, both nations are given more than the general population from the school board of Ottawa.

It's only a matter of time that the childs principle at his public school realizes that in order to get more handouts, he needs to have his school become a special school also. In due course everyone jumps aboard and the public school system begins to not function.

I feel we're in the early stages now of principles planning on how they are also going to make their school special.

[Who's Doing What?]

Quebec was 1 of the 2 'founding nations' of Canada.

Funny I was always taught it was France and Britain.

[mikedavid00]

Quebec was 1 of the 2 'founding nations' of Canada.

Funny I was always taught it was France and Britain.

You get the idea.

[Leafless]

It's not official. It's just common knowledge. Quebec meets the definition. Two nations of people came together to form Canada because Quebec was going to stay by itself during the formation.

Quebec agreed at confederation to Canada being a single nation.

Two cultures came together. Naturally the more dominant culture began to saturate the other culture, and the minority cultures had enough and faught back to protect their culture. They have a right to their culture.

Quebec always had a right to their language, civil law and religion. Maybe you can explain 'what other' constitutional rights Quebec has that has allowed them rights no other province in Canada is allowed to have?

I fail to understand what legal ramifications 'founding nations' has pertaining to charter rights concerning Quebec.

Is official 'federal bilingualism' a slap in the face to the English concerning an unearned government reward given to Quebec for refusing to assimilate, like everyone else in Canada?

If refusing to assimilate is a right, where is that written in the constitution?

[Leafless]

Since there doesn't seem to be any legal significance to this recognition of Quebec's distinctiveness, I would say no, there's not going to be constitutional trouble from this. There's nothing here that would require any constitutional talks. And since there are no powers or privileges arising from the motion to recognize Quebec as a nation within Canada, I can't see why other provinces would bother making a fuss.

It's like a kid walking past a school for "special kids" and saying "Mommy! Mommy! I want to be special too!" Aside from getting to wear a hockey-helmet when you play on the swings, being "special" isn't actually all that great.

You seem to forget the powers Quebec already possesses in relation to being referred to as the 'Quebecois as a nation within Canada' could easily accelerate to demands to be recognized as a country. They have powers other Canadian provinces do not have, courtesy of the federal government.

I think its significant and so does Mr. Manning.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...8a8eafd&k=17425

[mikedavid00]

Quebec agreed at confederation to Canada being a single nation.

I agree. But it was the formation of two 'groups' two nations that created Canada.

Quebec always had a right to their language, civil law and religion. Maybe you can explain 'what other' constitutional rights Quebec has that has allowed them rights no other province in Canada is allowed to have?

I was hoping you would ask. And this is why I disagree with Multiculturalism. It says they have the right to protect and maintain their culture which is their language. Anglo's have threatened that over the years. Supposeldy a while back only the white collar jobs were going to anglo's and the French were being treated as second class. So they faught back.. or stood up to this. They used 'language' as a way to garuntee they would get jobs by changing the status quo. From what I here, Harper was around at that time and very very very apposed to this.

Is official 'federal bilingualism' a slap in the face to the English concerning an unearned government reward given to Quebec for refusing to assimilate, like everyone else in Canada?

I agree. I'm from Ottawa and know first hand how it's like to loose job after job just because I cannot speak french. It was very upsetting. That's why I came to Toronto. Only to find that job after job also requires French.

If refusing to assimilate is a right, where is that written in the constitution?

Ask Trudeau. We have a lot of nations in Canada refusing to assimilate. Canada doens't believe in assimlation. Or Trudeau didn't.. same thing.

I can understand Quebec's frustration with anglo's all over Montreal. I agree Quebec has the right to protect their language. But not assimilating has caused a complete mess politically and holds back our country from moving fwd and getting things done.

Immigration - ties back to Quebec

Multiculturalism - ties back to Quebec

Canada as a group of minoroties - ties back to Quebec.

Jobs based off language in Canada - ties back to Quebec.

Canadian politicians - ties back to Quebec.

At this point I'd be happy if they would just seperate from Canada so we can move on and create our own policies and work gov't jobs without language being an issue.

This saturday I'll be spending Christmas holidy in a Bloc riding in Montreal. I love the French people, I don't like their leaders, politics, and what they have done to Canada as a whole.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Since there doesn't seem to be any legal significance to this recognition of Quebec's distinctiveness, I would say no, there's not going to be constitutional trouble from this. There's nothing here that would require any constitutional talks. And since there are no powers or privileges arising from the motion to recognize Quebec as a nation within Canada, I can't see why other provinces would bother making a fuss.

Of course there won't be any legal significance.

Through a motion in Parliament the Chretien Liberals recognized Quebec as a distinct society. That hasn't been an issue since.

The Quebec nation motion is very significant. It lays the groundwork for Harper to start making gains in Quebec again. He has a long way to go to even hold onto the seats that he won there in January. If he can do it, or even make gains, look to this motion as the starting point in Harper's *comeback* in Quebec.

[mikedavid00]

The Quebec nation motion is very significant. It lays the groundwork for Harper to start making gains in Quebec again. He has a long way to go to even hold onto the seats that he won there in January. If he can do it, or even make gains, look to this motion as the starting point in Harper's *comeback* in Quebec.

Quebecers are heavy swing voters true.

But they will always want to vote in their 'own'. The Liberal party is in all intensive purposes a Quebec/Immigrant party. The CPC is still seen as an outside party.

Although I feel CPC is more of an National party. I feel they represent all regions these days.. except maybe the east coast.

I remember back when the NDP really used to almost be the east coast party.

[Leafless]

Through a motion in Parliament the Chretien Liberals recognized Quebec as a distinct society. That hasn't been an issue since.

This is true.

I recently went over to Gatineau in Quebec to buy some liquor and although I was speaking English the whole time to the clerk at the cash, he was answering in French.

Talk about about a lack of respect for the majority language of Canada. I think it is a distinct reservation as some people properly describe the place.

If I would have know this prior to buying that liquor, I would have spent that $100.00 in Ontario.