Harper on Canada: 1 July 2007

[August1991]

"I believe we are more united than at any point, than we have been in four decades," said Harper, speaking in French.

"I believe the recognition of the Quebecois nation within a united Canada was an important step in our national reconciliation."

...

A new poll published Wednesday suggested that 68 per cent of Quebeckers would like to see the Parti Québécois drop its independence option and instead seek more powers for the province within Confederation.

The CROP poll of more 1,000 Quebeckers also found that 72 per cent believe that sovereignty is highly or totally improbable.

G & M

"As our national unity becomes firmer -- as I think it has over the past couple of years -- I think Canadians look for themselves to be an important voice in the world,'' said the prime minister.

CTV

I haven't been able to find the complete quotes of Harper's interview with CP. IMV, they were good. (Why are these unavailable?) In the French press, these were covered (as well as two different polls about sovereignty.)

Harper has every reason to be proud, and federalists in Canada have every reason to be proud of Harper.

He is the first anglophone Protestant PM who can speak comprehensible French, and who managed on his own to get 10 MPs elected in Quebec.

The history of northern North America is indeed an épopée, filled with surprises. Let`s see where this branch leads.

[M.Dancer]

The history of northern North America is indeed an épopée, filled with surprises. Let`s see where this branch leads.

These Brillant exploits! It is indeed an Epic Verse in our History.

Now are we still carrying an epee in one had and a Cross in the other?

[jdobbin]

Harper has every reason to be proud, and federalists in Canada have every reason to be proud of Harper.

He is the first anglophone Protestant PM who can speak comprehensible French, and who managed on his own to get 10 MPs elected in Quebec.

His attempt to woo Quebec with money has benefited the BQ and alienated several provinces over the issue of equalization.

He's right that Canadians are united. The latest poll shows they are united in believing he has screwed the Maritimes and Saskatchewan.

I believe Mulroney used to pat himself on the back as well. It reduced his party to two seats.

[August1991]

His attempt to woo Quebec with money has benefited the BQ and alienated several provinces over the issue of equalization.

He's right that Canadians are united. The latest poll shows they are united in believing he has screwed the Maritimes and Saskatchewan.

I believe Mulroney used to pat himself on the back as well. It reduced his party to two seats.

It may be the perception elsewhere in Canada that the money made all this possible. I beg to differ. Your guy, Trudeau, gave lotsa money to Quebec too - again in Anglo perceptions. Yet Trudeau was PM during a time of terrible divisiveness in Canadian history.

If the latest polls show that Harper has screwed the Maritimes and Saskatchewan, then I figure Harper has nothing much to worry about.

Trudeau's Liberals fell to 40 seats in 1984. If Mulroney's Tories fell to 2 seats in 1993, it was because Mulroney had to clean up Trudeau's mess. Trudeau may be considered a great PM in polls but no member of Quebec's National Assembly (of any party) has ever voted in favour of Trudeau's 1982 Constitution. Trudeau's Constitution was not a genuine effort in nation-building.

Trudeau was a provocative, one man show. He was a cowboy, in a country that works better with compromise. Trudeau was a strong man, not a democrat.

Harper is Canada's first WASP PM who can speak functional French. Harper is more in the line of Laurier (Canada's first Catholic PM) and King. He bends and twists.

Make no mistake. The 10 Tory federal MPs elected in Quebec in 2006, on Harper's coat tails, have changed Canadian politics.

Harper has reason to speak with pride of his accomplishments so far. Let's see what he does further.

« Parmi les réussites de notre nouveau gouvernement dont je suis le plus fier est la reconnaissance par le Parlement canadien du fait que les Québécois et les Québécoises forment une nation au sein d’un Canada uni. Nous avons pris un pas historique, parce qu’en adoptant cette résolution, les Canadiens ont dit oui aux Québécois et les Québécois ont dit oui au Canada. En politique, on prend des risques, mais les questions d’unité nationale et de réconciliation nationale sont plus importantes que n’importe quel parti ou n’importe quelle personne », a-t-il affirmé.

Link

[ScottSA]

If the latest polls show that Harper has screwed the Maritimes and Saskatchewan, then I figure Harper has nothing much to worry about.

How very true

[jdobbin]

It may be the perception elsewhere in Canada that the money made all this possible. I beg to differ. Your guy, Trudeau, gave lotsa money to Quebec too - again in Anglo perceptions. Yet Trudeau was PM during a time of terrible divisiveness in Canadian history.

If the latest polls show that Harper has screwed the Maritimes and Saskatchewan, then I figure Harper has nothing much to worry about.

Trudeau's Liberals fell to 40 seats in 1984. If Mulroney's Tories fell to 2 seats in 1993, it was because Mulroney had to clean up Trudeau's mess. Trudeau may be considered a great PM in polls but no member of Quebec's National Assembly (of any party) has ever voted in favour of Trudeau's 1982 Constitution. Trudeau's Constitution was not a genuine effort in nation-building.

Trudeau was a provocative, one man show. He was a cowboy, in a country that works better with compromise. Trudeau was a strong man, not a democrat.

Harper is Canada's first WASP PM who can speak functional French. Harper is more in the line of Laurier (Canada's first Catholic PM) and King. He bends and twists.

Make no mistake. The 10 Tory federal MPs elected in Quebec in 2006, on Harper's coat tails, have changed Canadian politics.

Harper has reason to speak with pride of his accomplishments so far. Let's see what he does further.

You are beginning to sound like a PR guy for the man.

Mulroney lost the support he did because of Trudeau? I think you must be imagining things. He lost support because people like Harper abandoned him.

As for the Tories bidding good bye to seats in Saskatchewan and the Martimes, okay...done.

[sharkman]

It may be the perception elsewhere in Canada that the money made all this possible. I beg to differ. Your guy, Trudeau, gave lotsa money to Quebec too - again in Anglo perceptions. Yet Trudeau was PM during a time of terrible divisiveness in Canadian history.

Also Chretien dropped alotta billions in Quebec as well. It's odd that Liberal supporters level this charge at Harper when their der Leaders have been doing it for decades.

Harper winning seats in Quebec was a turning point that was quickly ignored by the press, but it quietly shapes the political landscape.

[Mad_Michael]

He is the first anglophone Protestant PM who can speak comprehensible French, and who managed on his own to get 10 MPs elected in Quebec.

John Turner didn't speak French? (I have no idea if Turner was Protestant or Catholic).

And we'd have to go back to Pearson to find a PM not from Quebec or Alberta (Campbell doesn't count).

And Diefenbaker's sweep of some 50 seats in Quebec doesn't count either eh?

[Mad_Michael]

Harper winning seats in Quebec was a turning point that was quickly ignored by the press, but it quietly shapes the political landscape.

A Federal Conservative party has swept Quebec's seats twice. Diefenbaker and Mulroney.

Harper's handful of Quebec seats is not impressive at all and does nothing re-shape the political landscape. The political landscape of Canada is the same as it was ten or twenty years ago. Harper has changed nothing.

[Posit]

Actually he has changed it for the worse. His near fascist dictator approach to controlling his caucus hasn't been seen since John A. McDonald.

[Argus]

Actually he has changed it for the worse. His near fascist dictator approach to controlling his caucus hasn't been seen since John A. McDonald.

You clearly have never read any books, never done any studies, and know nothing whatsoever about the history of Canadian politics and political leadership.

Suffice to say that "never been seen since" should be concluded with "Paul Martin, Jean Chretien, Brian Mulroney, Joe Clark, and Pierre Trudeau."

[Posit]

Nope, I read lots. Those other guys were a different kettle of fish. Harper is near-fascist in his approach to running the government and he is acting like a little Napoleon, just like John A. McDonald did. Maybe you should start with the basic history of politics series....

[geoffrey]

And we'd have to go back to Pearson to find a PM not from Quebec or Alberta (Campbell doesn't count).

Martin and Harper were both born in Ontario, Paul essientially grew up there.

[August1991]

A Federal Conservative party has swept Quebec's seats twice. Diefenbaker and Mulroney.

Harper's handful of Quebec seats is not impressive at all and does nothing re-shape the political landscape. The political landscape of Canada is the same as it was ten or twenty years ago. Harper has changed nothing.

Diefenbaker didn't win those seats. Duplessis gave them to Diefenbaker. Mulroney was a francophone Catholic from Quebec.

Moreover, Harper hasn't designated a Quebec lieutenant as King, Macdonald or Pearson did.

Politics often appears to be a one-man affair but in fact, there are many in the background unseen. Politics is a group affair. But Harper won those 10 seats in Quebec in his own right. Quebec politics have changed, and Canadian politics too.

If you don't believe me, go buy and read Chantal Hebert's book.

It was New Year's Eve in 2005 when it first hit her. After nearly 10 years in Montreal, taking the pulse of her francophone acquaintances, Chantal Hebert was hearing something truly remarkable at the dinner table conversation.

Her leftist guests were talking about voting for Stephen Harper.

Link

John Turner didn't speak French? (I have no idea if Turner was Protestant or Catholic).

Turner is Catholic (and Clark and Martin too).

I suppose one could argue that Pearson - a WASP - is comparable to Harper but Pearson's French was non-existent.

Mulroney lost the support he did because of Trudeau? I think you must be imagining things. He lost support because people like Harper abandoned him.

I'll put a partisan spin on this and say that Mulroney tried to clean up Trudeau's mess, and just got covered in sh*t instead.

It's now the turn of the Liberal Party to suffer from the consequences of what Trudeau did.

[jdobbin]

I suppose one could argue that Pearson - a WASP - is comparable to Harper but Pearson's French was non-existent.

I'll put a partisan spin on this and say that Mulroney tried to clean up Trudeau's mess, and just got covered in sh*t instead.

It's now the turn of the Liberal Party to suffer from the consequences of what Trudeau did.

Was Pearson's French non-existent? I have seen clips of him speaking both on the national and international stage. French commentators called his language skills as eloquent. He was able to have long diplomatic talks with the French government in French. He was able to conduct all his business with the Quebec premier in French.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/liberals...s-language.html

I think Mulroney stepped into it all on his own when he awarded the CF-18 contract to Quebec and caused Preston Manning to boldly create the Reform party. But feel free to disagree.

As far as the Liberal party suffering because of Trudeau, the poll showing support for Trudeau kind of makes that argument seem false.

The polls for Harper, despite your boosterism, are below majority territory. An election today could even out them back in the Opposition. It is that close.

[Argus]

Nope, I read lots. Those other guys were a different kettle of fish. Harper is near-fascist in his approach to running the government and he is acting like a little Napoleon, just like John A. McDonald did. Maybe you should start with the basic history of politics series....

People on the fringes make these broad accusations, but then never back them up with anything. Chretien had an iron grip on his caucus and nobody on the left whined about this being fascist. Jack Layton has made it clear that it's his way or the highway for caucus members, who are not permitted to vote according to the needs or wants of their constituents or their consciences. Harper's control is considerably less than theirs but somehow it's him that you call names.

[Michael Bluth]

People on the fringes make these broad accusations, but then never back them up with anything. Chretien had an iron grip on his caucus and nobody on the left whined about this being fascist. Jack Layton has made it clear that it's his way or the highway for caucus members, who are not permitted to vote according to the needs or wants of their constituents or their consciences. Harper's control is considerably less than theirs but somehow it's him that you call names.

I don't think it is fair to say Harper's control is considerably less than that of Chretien's and Layton's.

It is fair to say that they are similar approaches and to point out the hypocrisy of the left in calling Harper a facist for it.

Martin didn't have that same level of control ... but he wasn't too successful.

[Topaz]

Wouldn't it be refreshing to have a PM that treats ALL the provinces and territories the SAME!!! I wonder how a PM from the Martimes would treat all of Canada? Perhaps. Williams could bring back the PC's at the Fed. level and run against Harper.

[weaponeer]

Nope, I read lots. Those other guys were a different kettle of fish. Harper is near-fascist in his approach to running the government and he is acting like a little Napoleon, just like John A. McDonald did. Maybe you should start with the basic history of politics series....

That's what leaders do, they lead, they call the shots.....

[hiti]

And for that "great" speech, he received polite applause.

[geoffrey]

Williams could bring back the PC's at the Fed. level and run against Harper.

Most would just laugh at the irrational cry baby from Newfoundland. Not much hope there. Harper has been pretty fair in dealing to all provinces (Saskatchewan got a crappy deal, Quebec got a good one).

Each Atlantic Premier wants to keep the Accord (an option they have) and get all the new benefits, plus be allowed to take in so much transfer money that they are richer than the provinces they get the money from.

That doesn't sell to anyone but the biggest of fools. Apparently there are enough to re-elect Danny Williams.

[Topaz]

I would think Harper would have more to worry about as far as the election is concernmed. He only had what 32-37% of the vote, when elected. Does he still have those voters? How many has he peeved off since then?? I didn't watch Harper for the July 1st, I watched Princes William and Harry instead and by what I saw on the news about Harper's party I didn't miss anything interesting.

[jbg]

I suppose one could argue that Pearson - a WASP - is comparable to Harper but Pearson's French was non-existent.

Wrong. During his visit with De Gaulle he spoke French, De Gaulle spoke English. That was in his New York Times obituary.

[jdobbin]

Wrong. During his visit with De Gaulle he spoke French, De Gaulle spoke English. That was in his New York Times obituary.

I pointed that out when it was mentioned earlier. Pearson was quite adept at the language of diplomacy. He spoke French quite well by all accounts and set the standard for later leaders of all parties.

[August1991]

I pointed that out when it was mentioned earlier. Pearson was quite adept at the language of diplomacy. He spoke French quite well by all accounts and set the standard for later leaders of all parties.

On the contrary, one of the sad facts of Canada's foreign service prior to the arrival of Trudeau was its surpring inability to speak French (or any language other than English for that matter).

Here is a clip of Pearson reading a prepared text in French (about the explusion of de Gaulle). You be the judge.