Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Harper Lobs Hand Grenade at Quebec

Brent Tyler...dragon slayer!
Watching the separatists foam at the mouth over the announcement that the federal government will join a lawsuit to declare Quebec's Bill 99 unconstitutional is bittersweet, for too long Harper has refused to engage the Parti Quebecois over its constant baiting of Canada.

But the winds of fortune have shifted for the Conservatives and not in a good way with support softening, especially due to the Senate scandal.
In an effort to shift the optic, Harper is making a another major shift in policy towards Quebec, after first trying engagement, then benign neglect and now open hostility.

And so, once and for all, Harper is writing off Quebec in an attempt to consolidate power elsewhere in Canada and from here, there is no road back.
For the Conservatives, as with the PQ, it now suits the political agenda to enter into a 'chicane' with Quebec, where if and when the fight gets nasty and loud, he can count on a fed-up ROC backing his play to the hilt.
The louder constitutional war drums beat in Quebec City and Ottawa, the better for the Conservatives, that is the Harper rationale.

When the issue of sovereignty and Quebec nationalism rears its ugly head in any serious manner, it becomes the defining political issue of the day and voters, looking for a gladiator, will overlook almost any past transgressions and peccadillo.

Of all the federal leaders, most Canadians view Harper as the most viable adversary to Quebec's aggressive nationalist policy and best suited to defend Canada's interests.
Would you really want to see Justin Trudeau or worse still Thomas Mulcair take on Quebec?

There is a profound change in attitudes in the ROC concerning Quebec and Harper may be tapping into the growing sentiment that appeasement has gone too far.
Harper has demonstrated the ability to form a majority government without Quebec, so throwing the recalcitrant province under the bus, a cynical but altogether viable option.

The Achilles Heel of the federal Liberals and Ndper's is the issue of Quebec, both Trudeau and Mulcair seen to be coddling enablers.

Here's the NDP's sad-sack position on independence:


If the issue of Quebec gains traction as a bone of contention in the next election, you can count on another Conservative majority government and so the wheels are turning.
Harper now accepts what we all knew for a while, that Conservatives are dead and buried in Quebec, with no hope of improving fortunes in the next federal election.
Harper is the only federal leader who will benefit from a political fight with Quebec and this, big time.

Also to be considered is the impending court date for the Bill 99 challenge mounted by private citizen Keith Henderson, ably represented by Brent Tyler.

Clearly Bill 99 is going to be struck down and Harper cannot resist stealing the credit, after all, leaving it up to Tyler and Henderson to defend the Canadian Constitution, especially since they will inevitably win their day in court, is not good politics.
It would for all intents and purposes show up the federal government as negligent and perhaps gun-shy, not something that Harper could tolerate.

For Tyler and Henderson, its been a rough and expensive road and so if the Feds are going to steal their thunder, I hope Ottawa will have the decency to reimburse them fully for their time and effort.
I know it has been very rough on them, both financially and emotionally.

Now for those unfamiliar with the case, let's briefly deconstruct what has and is going on.
For an excellent and very detailed account read this Maclean's article.

After Quebec's narrow referendum loss, Stephane Dion, the then Liberal Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs asked the Supreme Court to pronounce itself on the legality of independence and referendums via three key questions.

On September 30, 1996, Dion submitted three questions to the Supreme Court of Canada constituting the Supreme Court Reference re Secession of Quebec:
  1. Under the Constitution of Canada, can the National Assembly, legislature, or government of Quebec effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally?
  2. Does international law give the National Assembly, legislature, or government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally? In this regard, is there a right to self-determination under international law that would give the National Assembly, legislature, or government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally?
  3. In the event of a conflict between domestic and international law on the right of the National Assembly, legislature, or government of Quebec to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally, which would take precedence in Canada? Wikipedia
The court replied;
On August 20, 1998, the Supreme Court answered, concluding that Quebec does not have the right to secede unilaterally under Canadian or international law. However, the Government of Canada would have to enter into negotiations with the Quebec government if Quebeckers expressed a clear will to secede. It confirmed that the Parliament of Canada had the power to determine whether or not a referendum question was clear enough to trigger such negotiations. The Constitution of Canada would remain in effect until terms of secession were agreed to by all parties involved, and these terms would have to respect principles of democracy; minority and individual rights as outlined in the Canadian constitution. Wikipedia
This led to Ottawa drafting the Clarity Act which set out the terms and conditions for sovereignty which includes the requirement for a clear referendum question and a clear majority.

Lucien Bouchard and the PQ replied several days later with Bill 99, passed in the Quebec Parliament, which basically said that Quebec and Quebec alone could decide the terms and conditions of any referendum on sovereignty.
Bill 99
FINAL PROVISIONS
13. No other parliament or government may reduce the powers, authority,sovereignty or legitimacy of the National Assembly, or impose constraints on the democratic will of the Quebec people to determine its own future.”
Are you kidding me?
This last clause is not only unconstitutional but patently ridiculous, because under the terms, if a majority separatist government is elected, it could then make up its own rules, perhaps lowering the threshold to 25% plus one or restrict eligibility to participate in the referendum to citizens born in Quebec or allow children aged 16  to vote, or anything else they wished in order to tip the scales.

Ridiculous?

My examples may be exaggerated, but if the question of sovereignty is only a Quebec matter, to be decided by Quebecers alone under terms and conditions that itself dictates, there is nothing to stop a majority separatist government from declaring unilateral independence without a referendum

Clearly Bill 99 cannot withstand any court challenge, it is just too stupid.
Read the petition written by Brent Tyler, who remains one of the very few heroes in the fight against unfettered Quebec nationalism.


I caught Brent giving a couple of interviews on the French language network and must congratulate him on his calm demeanour and sang-froid.
In one interview on a morning show, Salut Bonjour!, the woman putting questions to Brent looked like she wanted to murder him.
Here's another  interview where Brent toys with his Radio-Canada interlocutor. Link{fr}

Everyone, including the PQ knows how this will turn out, with Bill 99 eviscerated and the Clarity Act, the law of the land.
It reminds me of the original Bill 101 that was so clearly unconstitutional, one provision after another has been struck down over the years.

The comical part about this, is that the majority of Quebecers actually support both the Clarity Act and Bill 99 at the same time, a contradiction in terms, which speaks to the intelligence of voters.

Lucien Bouchard admitted that if he had asked Quebecers to pronounce against the Clarity Act via a referendum, he would have lost and so clearly the province remains bound by its terms, like it or not.

No doubt the PQ will declare another 'humiliation' in the inevitable rejection of the courts of Bill 99 and if they'd like to make a fight about it, they have a partner in Stephen Harper.

If The Charter of Secularism is passed, there's no doubt now that Ottawa will challenge the law as well, Harper's action in regards to Bill 99 now paves the way.

Let us remember that next year, the Equalization Payment program is up for renewal and if Harper decides to punish Quebec in order to win support in the ROC, well.... I don't want to think about.

149 comments:

  1. "Harper has demonstrated the ability to form a majority government without Quebec, so throwing the recalcitrant province under the bus, a cynical but altogether viable option."

    You know what? This is the sort of thing the PQ does to Montreal. They win almost all of their seats off the island and use the will of roq to fight a culture war in Montreal. Beating us over the head the entire time with language laws and rhetoric about assimilation. Since it's the PQ in power I think it's fitting they get a taste of their own medicine. Let them eat a few political slaps to the head, we've had our fair share on the island.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm with MM. It will be a blast watching them backdown,as they say, Money talks ans BS walks, they'll have to think twice about those equalization payments to keep wonderland going. Lolololololololololo....finally Ottawa has Balls!,,,,, and Henderson should go down in History, for giving them a pair!,,, Bravo sir, well done, remind me to treat u to a beer!,,,,

      Delete
    2. The PQ have abolutely no respect for democracy as an institution. It's simply something else to "game"/fix to their advantage.

      If the Liberals/CAQ had any balls they would be talking about "redistricting Quebec".

      The only way to fix the Quebec situation is to get back to 1 vote for seppis is 1 vote. Not this crap now where a Montreal vote counts for half of a seppie vote off island.

      This is an absolute disgrace. It has been continuing for decades and the politicians (Liberals among them) have no interest in doing anythign to fix the situation.

      You have to wonder about the competence of the Liberals (or perhaps their loyalty) when they are in power for a decade and don;t lift a single finger to fix a situation that is a mockery of a democracy and dirctly hurts the Liberals more then any other party.

      Perhaps the issue for the Liberals is it helps Montreal and maybe anglophones. That's the real issue.

      The Liberals don;t ever want to have been seeing doing anything to help anglo's or immigrants in the eye of the pure laine looser.

      That's the most important part about the Liberals. They would rather not help anglo's and immigrants rather then be accused of helping them.

      This way they can play with the "soft nationalist".

      Basically what we have are opportunistic assholes in our politicians.

      Appearance of democracy without the real hallmarks of it.

      Delete
  2. Well Harper is definitely going to have to do something drastic to change the political discourse in Ottawa, leaving all summer didn't fix it, peroging the government didn't do it and flying out of country didn't do it either. With Duffy dropping bombs about what Harper knew and when he knew it, I don't see things getting better for him.

    ReplyDelete
  3. FROM ED
    I find it hard to get into the innumerable words of the documents, especially since the whols thing is probabaly a blast of hot air.
    When the PQ loses the next election it will be dissimated and I'm certain the Liberal Government would concede the whole thing
    anyway.. Harper got along good with Couillard even putting him up for order of Canada. it was only the underhandedness of Dr. Porter that put a wedge between them, however they are still good friends. What we need is an election not court cases. Ed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Liberals didn't do anything to revoke Bill 99 since the PQ put it on the books 13 years ago, and they aren't going to do anything to get rid of it if they get reelected come December. That's not to say they actually support it, but publicity they need to support it so that they don't look weak or in league with the dreaded federal government boogymen. Why would the PLQ even bother wade into that quagmire? Everyone can see the courts are going to strike it down as being unconstitutional and unenforceable, the PLQ can just sit back and wait for that to happen. It's such a joke law that the federal government didn't even bother with it until now, so why should the PLQ get involved and take any blow back from it.

      Delete
    2. At this point in time an election could prove to be fatal for us or the PQ. No one can foresee what is going to happen come December and it's a toss up. Feelings are running pretty high. In case the PQ does happen to get a majority (God forbid) some ground rules via the courts have to be decided - there is no getting around that. I support Mr. Tyler and Mr. Henderson to the hilt on this - let's get these crazy quebec laws put in the garbage where they belong. They have been allowed to run this scam on the people of quebec for far, far too long. Everyone that is old enough to vote must be made fully aware of exactly what they are voting for and what they are going to lose when they cast that vote!

      Delete
    3. FROM ED
      Why do you judge what the Liberals would do from what others have done in the past. A Liberal government would make all this redundant simply because the PQ will be gone. Dr. Couillard is a French man who thinks in English. He calls himself a Canadaian who lives in Quebec and he has a record for getting rid of negativism.
      Anyone who has dealt with the Quebec government agencies knows the negative mind of the Francophone. Trying to deal with Quebec for my Grandson's bursaries I'm told, "I can't speak to you without written permission from your Grandson.." I say, "You have that it's in his file." answer "Yes for his Grandfather, but how do I know your his Grandfather?" Me- "Because I have the online password." "But I have no way to know he gave it to you., how did you get his password.?" "I have the password because I created the bloody password. He does not have the patience to speak to government employees who ask stupid questions." " OK now you're being nasty so we better move on. Alright what did you want to know.?' Would you believe my 77 year old dislexic brain had forgotten by that time what I needed to know. I said, "I'll call back." and hung up.
      I'm sure an election will make a tremendous change for all of us.

      Delete
    4. I'm guessing that's what they'll do for three reasons: 1. Politics is 50% style and message and 50% substance, and let's be honest I'm being generous on the substance part. 2. It would be the smart political move to stay out of getting rid of Bill 99 as the courts will strike it down in a year anyway, so why get involved in that conflict at all? 3. Couillard has already come out against the federal governments joining the lawsuit, and the Liberals have voted for a motion that says the same thing today. Whether or not they believe in the bill they need to show they'd be willing to stand up to the federal government and fight for Quebec powers in order to win other the middle of the road voters who can be swayed by such a stance.

      Realistically if the Liberals do win the next election it will probably be in a minority capacity so there is no way they'd even have enough votes to kill bill 99, so they'd get a black eye from bringing it up and voting against it and not even be able to repeal it. Best to just avoid the whole thing.

      Delete
    5. @ed

      "Why do you judge what the Liberals would do from what others have done in the past."

      it's not "others" mate. all current liberals mp's including couillard are charest era people, and they all will be there next time. so i think it's totally correct to judge them from what they have done in the past. you suffer from delusional disorder mate.

      Delete
  4. Harper could reduce transfer payments and redirect the money saved to social programs in the ROC, cheaper daycare, maybe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LordDorchester

      By Quebec (population 7 million like NYC or the GTA) running up a 250$ Billion debt it has proven to the World it is incapable of maintaining its own finances. Using transfer payments as a crutch to fund overly generous social programs that rich provinces can only dream of is a policy that was destined for failure. The Quebec electorate is either ignorant of the fiscal realitiy Quebec faces or is just plain selfish with little regard for the taxpayers that will follow them. By cutting transfer payments next year, Harper is only doing the work Quebec's political class failed to do years ago by reigning in spending.

      Delete
    2. LordDorchester,

      I'm beginning to think it's plain seppie selfish culture. Even Seppies learned that 10-20 is -10.

      Remember, for seppies "Its all about them" and when it's not they throw a hissy fit. Kinda reminds me of a 4 year old misbehaving because they arn;t getting enough attention from their parents.

      "Future Quebecois society" would appear to be more fiction then actual possibility.

      Seppies don;t care what collateral damage is done as long as Pauline gets to drive around in her purple porsche while the other 99% take poorly run public transportation now that we can;t afford cars or gas.

      Delete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting letter from Grant in today's Gazette about how most of us feel caught in this vice in quebec:

      http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/sucked+into+trap+make+believe+squabbles/9068351/story.html

      Delete
    2. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/Statesmanship+last/9063137/story.html

      Delete
    3. FROM ED
      Cutie, the last two links don't sem to work. The first gets cut off by the Gazette selling subscriptions and the second says page not found. Ed

      Delete
    4. Ed - I checked them both out and they work fine for me. Maybe you have to be a subscriber to the Gazette (I am) but the one for the Citizen should work fine for you. Try them again.

      Delete
    5. You only have a limited number of free views of the gazettes news stories per month before they throw up a pay banner asking you to subscribe. If you're really desperate to read the article you can kind of see the lines above or below the ad and can slowly scroll down line by line, it's what I do some times :P.

      Delete
    6. Hi Ed,

      Install CCleaner & run the software. It"s fee off the internet. It's designed to clean out the cookies that are downloaded into your computer after your visiting certain sites. It will also allow you to bypass the pay wall a few times & make it seem like your visiting for the first time. When the pay wall shows up again just run the software, which takes seconds & you'll be able to view the site again. You can do this as many times as you'd like. It works for the Gazette & National Post & several other sites. The software is legal. I hope this helps.

      Delete
    7. FROM ED
      Cutie, Thatguy and FTS, Thank you. Ed

      Delete
    8. @fts

      your advice is to steal the gazette articles?!?

      @ed

      you're thanking fts because he showed you a way to steal articles?!? wtf mate? what other petty crimes do you indulge in ed?

      Delete
    9. Point to the section in the criminal code that says it's illegal to delete cookies off your computer and doing so constitutes theft. The Gazette has freely posted all of its articles onto the internet to see, not behind a paywall. They've decided to use a client side cookie based solution to encourage people to buy a subscription by making it harder (not impossible) to read the articles, which is essentially nagware, circumventing the cookie on your own personal operating system is not illegal nor would the gazette ever pursue anyone for doing so (as they wouldn't have a leg to stand on) and they want to gently encourage people to subscribe. Now if they had designated some material for paid subscribers only and put it behind a paywall and you circumvented this, then you might be getting into iffy territory.

      Delete
    10. @thatguy

      if honesty is one of your values i still think you should buy a subscription instead of trying to outsmart a private company's webmaster in order to put your hand on their product. it's pretty lame to support this kind of behaviour mate. maybe you'll adopt a better point of view when it goes bankrupt.

      Delete
    11. It has nothing to do with honesty as no one is lying or stealing, and it's not outsmarting the webmaster, the system isn't extremely restrictive on purpose. The idea of nagware/freeware is to gently encourage people to pay for free content by being nice about it, like giving out something for free but asking for a donation. That said I'm not encouraging it, I'm just saying it's not illegal or is theft.

      Delete
    12. @thatguy

      "That said I'm not encouraging it..."

      oh! we agree on the core then. why did you have to pull out all this fuss mate?!?

      Delete
    13. Because there's a happy medium between condemning something and encouraging it. I'm not going to go out and tell people they are amoral for getting piercings in...uncomfortable places, but at the same time I won't be going around encouraging people to get it done.

      Delete
    14. @thatguy

      i understand your point of view mate.

      Delete
  6. The Quebec has been complaining for ages that Ottawa is being bad for the province.
    Well, it seems that Quebec finally got what it was asking for, a PM who really doesn't care.
    That puts the previous PMs in another perspective.
    And by the time it actually happened, Quebec became so poor that most of its people are not ready to let go the welfare cheque.
    We'll see how big, or small, that cheque will become next year.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, prepare yourselves folks, because this year's provincial election will be brought to you by the Canadian equivalent of Fox TV:

    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201310/23/01-4702620-pkp-et-le-pq-philippe-couillard-se-dit-preoccupe.php

    Watch for the Libs and CAQ to be mercilessly slandered without end in Peladeau's media channels over the next two months.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I should have added this one in: http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201310/23/01-4702625-le-documentaire-la-premiere-critique-par-lopposition.php

      Julie Snyder is one of the most disgusting, reprehensible, vile women in this province. I hold other separatists such as Lise Lapointe and Sylvie Durocher with great disdain, but Snyder beats them all.

      So between her husband waging war against the opposition parties in his newspapers and newscasts, Snyder's production company is pumping out documentaries that make Pauline Marois appear like a demi-God.

      Old-school social engineering a la saveur Quebecoise.

      BTW, this was one of my favorite parts of the article: "Julie Snyder a aussi «guidé» le réalisateur Yves Desgagnés pour sa demande de subvention."

      This is fraud. This is another way for the Parti Quebecois to use public funds to finance its electoral campaign.

      Delete
    2. Pas plus mal que le couple Desmarais-PLQ.

      Delete
    3. Here is the link to the video. It's less of a documentary and more of an unabashed PR piece for Marois.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDcPcbgBhwY

      Delete
    4. Anonymous Coward,

      This is fraud. This is another way for the Parti Quebecois to use public funds to finance its electoral campaign.

      But TVA is a private network. So they could argue that it is a private project on a personality of the province. The thing is, how to convince DGEQ that this material is indeed a campaign material. If it is then its production costs must be counted as campaign cost and its donor must be revealed.

      Delete
    5. "and its donor must be revealed."

      The donor is likely to be Snyder's husband.

      Delete
    6. TVA has nothing to do with the documentary - they are merely a distribution channel.

      The funds would come from a government agency, for instance, SODEC.

      Here's the kicker however - Julie Snyder's been in business for a long time. The fact that her production company can't cover the entire tab for production speaks volumes.

      And one other note about Snide-r - for a nasty racist bitch who hates Anglos to the bone, she sure rips off a lot of American TV concepts.

      Delete
  8. OK, now while we all know what to expect from the likes of Peladeau and his uber-racist wife, here is something I'd never thought I'd see -- Josée Legault calling out Bernard Drainville on his shit:

    http://blogues.journaldemontreal.com/joseelegault/politique-quebecoise/la-consultation-invisible/#.UmfLwQPy-9k.twitter

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FROM ED
      Anonymous coward, I've lways had respect for Josee Legault. She is a smart economist and very pragmatic. She sees the handwriting on the wall and is a loyal separatist but she doesn't go for lies or bullshit. Ed

      Delete
    2. @ed

      "She is a smart economist and very pragmatic."

      sure mate. except she's not an economist.

      Delete
    3. FROM ED
      I have sen Josee legault outsmart the best of economists. on CTV and CNN news. This makes her a smart economist. Whether she does it professionally or not she is still a smart conomist.. Just like yourself If I said you're a dumb troll you could argue that you're not a dumb troll but you wll always be a dumb troll. Ed.

      Delete
    4. @ed

      and how do you call a dude who discusses with someone he considers to be a dumb troll?

      Delete
  9. Outraged as the PQ may be, most people in the province literally could not care about this esoteric legal crap.
    It's completely and utterly meaningless since not only do the people not want sovereignty, they don't want another referendum.

    Some lawyers want to argue and the PQ wants to froth at the mouth? Pffft. It's a nine-day wonder, just like that book which came out this summer alleging constitutional improprieties among judges and Pierre Trudeau and oh god nobody cares we already voted for Canada twice just shut up and go away.



    -Kevin

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "most people in the province literally could not care about this esoteric legal crap"

      When governments can't provide tangible results, they tend to go for the esoteric stuff. And this esoteric stuff works wonders in fostering false consciousness.

      If religion was once the opiate of the masses, modern-day nationalism is their crack cocaine today.

      Delete
  10. See what happens when they get power…? Corruption, fraud, money laundering…all disguised as something else, equalization, grants, subsidies…this all started under the liberals…

    WHY HAS QUEBEC, AS A PROVINCE RECEIVED FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NEARLY FIFTY PERCENT (50.%) OF THE EQUALIZATION FUNDS EVERY YEAR FROM 1957 TO 2013 ? Go check the numbers… What a scam!!!

    The so called Equalization from 1957 to 2013.

    The important FACT TO NOTE IS THAT QUEBEC HAS BEEN A "HAVE PROVINCE" EVERY YEAR 1957 TO 2013. Quebec's total share of 168,842,000,000 Billions of DOLLARS represents approx. FIFTY PER-CENT.


    This needs to be exposed ASAP. This would be bigger then any other scam this country has ever seen…no doubt about it.

    QUEBEC AS A SO CALLED "HAVE NOT" PROVINCE HAS RECEIVED OVER 168 BILLION DOLLARS OR FIFTY PERCENT(50.%) OF THE TOTAL EQUALIZATION PAYMENTS. Is anyone in this country willing to talk about this scam for Quebec???

    And how have they said thanks in french for all this money? Well try decades of anti-English language bigotry, racism, intolerance, hatred…a la bills 22, 178, 101…nice eh? These are the facts folks, you may not like them but it’s the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Isn't this just f------ wonderful. Close to a billion dollars WASTED on the damn charter:

    "966 million wasted so far on charter values a Quebec economic think tank has announced."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cutie,

      You know that the taxes that all the construction companies like Heagone and Simard Beaudry etc will help to cover these expenses.

      Oh wait, these companies don;t pay taxes! They have infiltrated the tax department and have been charged with 999 charges of fraud, tax evasion etc.

      Hehe, that's Quebec for you.

      The only people that actually make and PAY taxes are honest solid working federalists.

      On a regular note of mine.

      The SAQ has recently announced sales are down. Please people, keep buying as much wine and booze as you can in Ontario etc. The more tax money that gets denied Quebec, the faster we circle the bowl on the way down.

      Buying booze in another province is NOW LEGAL (thank you Harper). It's no longer "illegal" to drive to Hawksbury with your Quebec license plate and stock up on a hundreds of bottles.

      That simple act saves hundreds of dollars in tax revenue from falling into the hands of the insane seppies.

      FIX QUEBEC, STOP PAYING TAXES! (you are the only sucker paying them anyway)

      Just ask SR. You have to make more then 15K per year to pay taxes. That's tough when the only skills you have are regurgitating seppie propaganda.

      Delete
    2. Cutie003,

      966 million wasted so far on charter values a Quebec economic think tank has announced.

      I think this statement is misleading since it means that $966M is the direct cost so far for the Charter. The correct situation is that the debt of the Province has increased $966M since the Charter was announced.

      Delete
  12. Looks like it's going to be a very interesting year ahead of us.

    Harper is now starting to use Quebec as a distraction for the "fat puffy guy" and the "francophone steroid head" issue.

    Quebec is goign to want to use the Bill 99 along with Bill 14, and the Charter to distract the population.

    Basically both Quebec and Canada are about to go off on a "war of words" and distractions. The interesting part is for both the conservatives and the PQ thse are times to throw all the weight behind it or "die trying".

    Things will get super ugly. The upside will be Harper hard approach to Quebec vs the Federal Liberals giving them hand jobs.

    Please please please Harper, adjust the transfer payments down so Quebec goes bankrupt faster.

    The seppies will blame it on Canada, but they blame everything on Canada anyway.

    It's only a question of timing.

    We all have ringside seats for the dustup coming!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The seppies will blame it on Canada, but they blame everything on Canada anyway."

      @cebeuq

      Agree with you 100%.

      Separatists are nothing more than the reprehensible golddigger who has nothing but contempt for Ottawa when the tap ain't running. Hell, this goldigger hates Canada even when the money is coming in.

      To all the moderates here - why are we even bothering to show them the other cheek?

      They hate us.

      Time to return the favor, without needing to use any violence. Like Cebeuq said, let's shut off the financial aid from Ottawa.

      Then we'll see what the public really thinks of the PQ when they're forced to cut subsidized daycare and arts programs to make up the shortfall.

      We'll see what they think of the PQ when there's no other option but to finally start digging into those oil reserves and exploiting resources in the north.

      Delete
  13. I'm worried that any interference from the federal government will most likely be used by the PQ as a way to get more support from the soft nationalists. "Look at how Canada treats us!" I was convinced the PQ would quickly be removed from power, but if Harper goes down this path, we may see a lot more of the PQ government in the future. That is a very scary prospect, with the PQ destroying over 40k jobs in only 6 months.

    The PQ is already starting to downplay the whole fall election idea (http://tvanouvelles.ca/lcn/infos/national/archives/2013/10/20131023-110750.html). Could it be because they've realized that this conflict with the federal gov. will only lead to more support for the PQ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FROM ED
      I agree with you Stump. What Harper's doing is dangerous. Annoying the PQ may be fun for him but we will be the ones to suffer for what goes wrong. Ed

      Delete
    2. No matter what the Canadian government does, the PQ will twist everything around. They are master manipulators. The PQ even defies the Quebec Human Rights commission with regards to the Charter. It is better to fight the enemy than to appease them. The anglophones in Quebec and the Federal government has tried appeasement and look where it got us.

      Delete
    3. You are so right Anonymous! Appeasement is why we are where we are today in this damn province and we have to stop being cowards. If these people are going to keep breaking the laws of the country, it must be brought to the attention of all Canadians! If our ancestors had done the same thing, none of us would be living in a free country any longer. For heaven's sake we have to start standing up to these BULLIES and that's exactly what they are!

      Delete
    4. Stump,

      What's the definition of an idiot? Somebody that tries the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome.

      Seppies cannot be appeased. Quebec insecurities about language/socialism/church etc cannot be validated to any meaningful level.

      It's time to stop trying to appease and find middle ground with seppies. 40 years of that havn;t worked.

      Now it's time to get serious and push against seppies hard. Quebec going bankrupt is a *MUST*.

      Liberal appeasers are unable to change their strategy tho even after 40 years of watching it get nowhere.

      In the meantime the seppies have gotten bigger/dumber and more restrictive about language, culture, religion, economy etc.

      The old Federal Liberal way of dealing with Quebec for the last 40 years needs to be recognized for the unworkable strategy it is.

      We've given it 40 years to work. It hasn;t. It's not going to start.

      Seppies don;t do "deductive reasoning". They only have dogma to fall back on.

      Delete
    5. "What Harper's doing is dangerous"

      QC has been waging political war on the RoC for decades now, so the RoC is bound to hit back once in a while. What did you expect?

      Peace would be ideal, but reciprocating the blows is the second best thing. The worst thing is what you are suggesting: let QC swing its fists right and left, while the RoC does nothing out of fear of the PQ's "reprisals".

      The PQ is a bunch of political gangsters that needs to be taken on, not cowered in front of, regardless of what it is that we will "suffer" at the hands of the PQ infuriated by the feds. Besides, whatever the PQ wants to do, let them bring it on. At this point it doesn't matter, they've proven that they opt for extremist policies regardless of what the feds do or don't do.

      Delete
    6. "Seppies cannot be appeased. Quebec insecurities about language/socialism/church etc cannot be validated to any meaningful level."

      It is their excessive pride clashing with the reality of their insignificance.

      When you inflate pride, tell people that they're "maitres" and what not, it is bound to lead to tensions when they don't get these delusions of grandeur validated by reality.

      Delete
    7. APPEASEMENT DOES NOT WORK - we have to act and fight back against these bullies! We have no provincial government that is willing the stand by their country including the liberals! They all passed that stupid Bill 99 again this morning unanimously - again appeasing these separatists against their own Canadian laws! When the hell do people get angry enough to take action? Start writing and fighting back - your MP, your NA member, FB, newspapers, whatever, do not sit back and take this shit anymore! This will be your last chance to get your point across before they stop freedom of speech in this province!

      Delete
    8. "When the hell do people get angry enough to take action?"

      Vous ne ferez rien car vous ne pouvez rien :)

      Delete
    9. " They all passed that stupid Bill 99 again this morning unanimously"

      No surprise there.

      I was always wondering how the PQ wants to square the circle of on one hand antagonizing Canada in order to sell the idea that QC's secession from Canada is necessary, and on the other hand, immediately after getting the 50+1, to placate Canada so that Canada will sit down with Quebec to negotiate a "new economic and political partnership", as per the 1995 question.

      It always seemed to me that pequistes think that the RoC will just forget over night and will sit down to negotiate in good faith. It never seems to occur to the pequistes that after all the hostilities leading up to the break-up, Canada will come out a hostile and belligerent nation towards Quebec, not a nation with which to strike economic and political "partnerships".

      How can you say you will have a partnership with X, while you're constantly rattling X's cage? So I always wondered what magic wand Quebec is planning to use to turn an antagonized Canada into placated Canada.

      Delete
    10. Ill arrive souvent que les couples mariés s'entendent mieux après un divorce.

      Delete
    11. As long as we don;t have another prime minister from Quebec.

      It's a conflict of interest (actually lets just call it what it is, sedition) to have a francophone prime minister negotiate with Quebec.

      At that point that will be the enemy negotiating with a sympathizer.

      The upshot is the moment Quebec wants to leave we can finally say "heave ho" to the endless parade of Quebec prime ministers. That day will be the last prime minister to push language nonsense and other Quebec crap.

      The day after Quebec seperates the rest of Canada can finally start to dismantle the legacy of poverty and capitulation that Trudeau sold the population.

      We can clean the Federal civil service of all the gatineau employee's.

      Canada will be reborn with all the welfare lowlifes and language crazies finally gone.

      Imagine all the time our politicians would have if they didn;t have to spend any amount of time worrying about Quebec and its endless issues and complaints.

      The negotiating team for Canada in the post Quebec seperation won;t contain a single weak minded Quebecer hell bend on giving Quebec things to "buy them off".

      The decision will have been made. There is no point in sucking up to Quebec anymore then.

      Canada can finally negotiate with a solid hand and push for some serious concessions.

      You can;t negotiate with the enemy successfully when your own team is the enemy.

      This is what seppies don;t understand. They think negotiations with the free Canada will be like a meeting with Trudeau. Go behind closed doors, give Quebec whatever they want, screw all the other Canadians, and then arrogantly tell us it's in our best interest and he knows better.

      Free Canada (ie Free of quebec insanity) will be much better negotiators.

      The fact millions of Canadians will demand no more concessions to Quebec will help too!

      Delete
    12. "Ill arrive souvent que les couples mariés s'entendent mieux après un divorce."

      What world is this guy living in?

      Delete
    13. @Adski

      Oh, he just hails from a part of Quebec few people (with commonsense have heard of): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiHJ0EdVY4o

      Delete
    14. Anonymous Coward,

      Please do not insult Who Framed Roger Rabbit this way. It is one of my favorite movies growing up.

      Delete
    15. Thanks for the shout out guys! lol

      For anyone who doesn't know, it's a highbrow movie that talks about life :)

      Some dialogue in the movie:


      Jessica Rabbit: You don't know how hard it is being a woman looking the way I do.
      Eddie Valiant: You don't know how hard it is being a man looking at a woman looking the way you do.
      Jessica Rabbit: I'm not bad. I'm just drawn that way.

      And:

      Eddie Valiant: You crazy rabbit! I'm out there risking my neck for you, and what are you doing? Singing and dancing!
      Roger Rabbit: But I'm a toon. Toons are supposed to make people laugh.
      Eddie Valiant: Sit down!
      Roger Rabbit: You don't understand. Those people needed to laugh.
      Eddie Valiant: Then when they're done laughing, they'll call the cops. That guy Angelo would rat on you for a nickel.
      Roger Rabbit: Not Angelo. He'd never turn me in.
      Eddie Valiant: Why? Because you made him laugh?
      Roger Rabbit: That's right! A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have.

      Delete
  14. How much did L Harel make people laugh when she suggests a minister of english repression for Montreal.

    Lets revisit other things that are more needed in Montreal then that.

    Minister of keeping the PQ away from Montreal
    Minister of Italian people relations

    maybe just
    Minister of Rizzutto relation

    Minister of construction workers that don;t work
    Minister of road construction co-ordination
    Minister of small scams to fill politicians pockets
    Minister of union scams
    etc

    The list of things that Montreal actually needs is massive.

    JF Lisee told the old battleaxe Harel what to say. "Look Harel, you arn;t getting back in. Can you make a bunch of noise for us seppies. We are very unhappy that Montreal isn;t embracing backward PQ values."

    Harel should be charged under an order of dereliction of duty, lying to constituents, disruption of a public discussion etc.

    Anything they can find to bury the bitch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Harel is in real danger of losing her seat so she throws out that completely idiotic Montreal tongue troopers idea to try and desperately keep her seat, regardless of what kind of damage it does to the rest of her party. To Harel loyalty ends when it might affect her pay cheque, real stand up act.

      Delete
    2. I'll respect Harel and the other seppies right after they stop trying to take away our human rights and force language laws down our throat.

      IE never. seppies are to be treated with utter disdain.

      There is no respect for fellow human beings in the province the PQ wants.

      People that give seppies respect and should not are what we call Liberals.

      SR, here is some cultural background for you so you can understand all the dirty immigrants and anglo's.

      In the rest of the world respect is something that is earned not given.

      Seppies want respect but don;t do anything to deserve it.

      Harassing 12 year old children to go to French schooling in violation of the UN charter gets you respect from Hitler. Nobody else.

      Delete
    3. I wouldn't bother with him, cebeuq.

      He's another example of someone who just doesn't get it.

      That's the problem with spoiled children - when you soak them in enough sugar you'll never succeed in reversing the effects.

      Look at the numbers James Wolfe posted below. Just look at how much money our redheaded stepchild got...and yet of course, they have nothing but resentment.

      The steps to reversing this tendency are simple, but no one has the guts to do it:

      1. Dissolve the public unions or hobble the shit out of them with ultra-tight clauses
      2. Introduce extreme laws against corruption (we're talking 30-year sentences here)
      3. Help Ottawa pass anti-sedition legislation
      4. Make it mandatory to offer all Quebeckers who want it, the right to study in English
      5. Privatize bodies such as the SAQ (this will help stifle the entitlement complex)

      So easy...yet so little guts.

      Delete
    4. The divorce from Canada will NOT AND I REPEAT WILL NOT be pleasant in any way, shape or form for you separatist idiots out there. You have created so much hate and anger among Canadians and the minorities in this province, and they have spread the word about you all over the world, that you will be treated with disdian and mistrust and you will pay dearly for what you have done to our country and especially to this province. If you think the divorce between the Trumps was something to behold, you've seen nothing until you sit down with the new Canada and just try to get anything you want.

      Cebeuq is totally right in his assessment of the situation and the ROC and the US will tell you to go screw yourselves. The only thing I hope he is wrong about is firing all the public servants in Gatineau as I'm hoping against hope that we will be part of the National Capital Region and f--- quebec. The public servants that are separatist and working for the feds should be fired, that's for sure, because there are a lot of them but that shouldn't be too difficult because they can't keep their mouths closed and everyone knows who they are. I'm sure there are lists that have been complied in each department just to keep track of those that have declared their loyalties. Idiots and a##holes; should be fired and made to pay back their salary!

      Delete
    5. "Harassing 12 year old children to go to French schooling"

      Alors transformons le Québec en "canadian baby factory".

      Delete
    6. @cutie003

      "The public servants that are separatist and working for the feds should be fired, that's for sure,..."

      and should federalist public servants working for the quebec government be fired too in your humble opinion?

      Delete
    7. Only if they're against having a provincial government? As that would be a more apt comparison than the one you're putting forward.
      Of course no one should be fired from a government job for their political views so long as it does not affect their functioning as an employee. They'll just have to live with the knowledge of being complete hypocrites, like a communist working at a corporate bank, they've sold out their ideals for a pay cheque, and they'll have to try and reconcile that.

      Delete
    8. "The public servants that are separatist and working for the feds should be fired, that's for sure,..."

      Yes absolutely...and ASAP, how dare they earn a living off of the entity that they seek to destroy. Get rid of them they have no business working for CANADA when they stab it in the back at every time. OUT OUT OUT.

      "and should federalist public servants working for the quebec government be fired too in your humble opinion?"

      That's a joke right? Cause here's the punch line: THERE AREN'T ANY LOLOLOLOLOL, your seppie friends make sure of that.

      Delete
    9. Sorry that guy but their political views, IMHO, do affect their jobs and the attitudes of everyone around them. They should be fired - being a conservative vs a liberal is different than being a traitor to one's country vs participating in active dialogue of being a traitor to their own employer. Who's to say it doesn't affect their job? I would think, on a daily basis, I would not be a very devoted employee to an employer I hate i.e. I would give no where near the effort that I would if I liked same employer.

      Delete
    10. "Who's to say it doesn't affect their job?"

      Who's to say it does? Or does for every separatist. If they are under-performing, or acting in inappropriate ways fire them because you have demonstrable evidence of their negligence as an employee, this goes for all employees. You can't go around firing everyone based on their associations preemptively, the charter of rights and freedoms protects people against this. You can't be against things like the charter of "values" or the violation of rights by the PQ and then want to do something just as bad. Sometimes it's harder to take the high road and do what is right, but if you sink to their level of general discrimination against people you don't like, out of anger, fear or whatever, you become as bad as they are.

      Delete
    11. Would espionage be accepted for a reason to fire these people? There would be many ways they could hurt their employer while doing their respective jobs i.e. it would be like North Korea and/or South Korea maintaining employees from one another's countries. I would not consider that a violation of their "rights" as they do not have to abide by the same charter of "rights" as we do. They don't even do that now and they are still part of Canada.
      I don't think that keeping these people on as employees from a hostile country would be appreciated and/or required.

      Delete
    12. Of course espionage would be a reason to fire an employee, most government employees sign NDAs which prohibit them from discussing their work or delicate information, they can even be prosecuted or fined based on the severity of the breech. That said you cannot preemptively fire all employees who prescribe to a certain worldview, if they are decent employees, based on the justification that it is possible that they might, at some point maybe, pass on information, any employee could do that. Separatists are Canadian citizens and should be treated as such, by advocating discrimination against a minority group (separatists) in order to prevent a problem which doesn't exist (espionage) you're essentially advocating the same discrimination the PQ wants to push through with it's charter.

      It's important to remember that separatist is a very broad definition and a group comprised of very different levels of support and opinions on what Quebec should look like, a QS separatist will likely be different markedly from a PQ separatist and even among the PQ there is a huge range. Not all of them support stripping of rights and engaging in discrimination even though they may want an independent Quebec. There is no reason to think a separatist would engaged in espionage, let alone most of them.

      Delete
    13. I was speaking of following separation from Canada. Filling positions in the Canadian Federal Government with employees from a country called quebec would not be appreciated nor understood in any way shape or form. Why would they employ people from another country for jobs that their own citizens can do? Wouldn't even be given a second thought I'm sure. Competitions for employment would be closed to anyone but Canadian Citizens. In fact, most of them are now unless they are seeking someone with extra special skills. There are enough people looking for work without them bringing in people that do not reside in their own country. Those that would be interested in continuing to work for the Canadian Federal Government would be expected to move to Canada and that would be the only way that they could continue in their job.

      Delete
    14. Oh, if separation occurs? Oh yeah for sure they'd all be canned but so would everyone from Quebec. There's no way the new Canada could justify keeping them on the payroll, but I wouldn't feel too bad for them based on how bloated the Quebec bureaucracy is now, if they had to take over the role of the federal government as well there'd be more jobs than people in the province!

      Delete
  15. Quebec has scammed this country for over 50 years…this should be exposed for what it truly is, money laundering…one gigantic boondoggle with Quebec being on the take.


    TOTAL EQUALIZATION PAYMENTS TO PROVINCES - 1957 to 2011 (55 YEARS)

    THE TOTAL WAS THREE HUNDRED AND SEVEN BILLION, EIGHT HUNDRED AND THIRTY-SIX MILLION DOLLARS. ($ 307,836,000,000)

    NEWFOUNDLAND, received over twenty-five billion dollars ($25.095) or 8.2 % of the total for the years 1957 to 2007 (51 years), but did not receive any payments for the years 2008 to 2011 (4 years).

    PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND, received over seven billion dollars ($ 7.424) or 2.4 % of the total for the years 1957 to 2011 (55 years).

    NOVA SCOTIA, received over thirty-five billion dollars ($ 35.701) or 11.6 % of the total for the years 1957 to 2011 (55 years).

    NEW BRUNSWICK, received over thirty-four billion dollars ($ 34.745) or 11.3 % of the total for the years 1957 to 2011 (55 years).

    QUEBEC, received over one hundred and fifty-three billion dollars ($ 153.618) or 49.9 % of the total for the years 1957 to 2011 (55 years).

    ONTARIO, received over three billion dollars ($ 3.159) or 1.1 % of the total for the years 2009 to 2011 (3 years) but did not receive payments for the years 1957 to 2008 (52 years).

    MANITOBA, received over thirty-six billion dollars ($ 36.950) or 12.0 % of the total for the years 1957 to 2011 (55 years).

    SASKATCHEWAN, received over eight billion dollars ($ 8.138) or 2.6 % of the total for the years 1957 to 1974 (18 years); the years 1976 to 1980 (5 years); the years 1986 to 2007 (22 years) but did not receive payments for the years 1975 (1 year); the years 1981 to 1985 (9 years) and the years 2008 to 2011 (4 years).

    ALBERTA, received ninety MILLION dollars ($ 90 million) or 0.0 % % of the total for the years 1957 to 1964 (8 years) but did not receive any payments for the years 1965 to 2011 (47 years).

    BRITISH COLUMBIA, received over two billion dollars ($ 2.556) or 0.8 % of the total for the years 1957 to 1961 (5 years); the year 1999 (1 year); the year 2001 (1 year); the years 2003 to 2006 (4 years) but did not receive payments for the years 1962 to 1998 (37 years); 2000 (1 year); 2002 (1 year) and the years 2007 to 2011 (5 years).

    This needs to be exposed ASAP. This would be bigger then any other scam this country has ever seen…no doubt about it.

    QUEBEC AS A SO CALLED "HAVE NOT" PROVINCE HAS RECEIVED OVER 168 BILLION DOLLARS OR FIFTY PERCENT(50.%) OF THE TOTAL EQUALIZATION PAYMENTS. Is anyone in this country willing to talk about this scam for Quebec???

    And how have they said thanks in french for all this money? Well try decades of anti-English language bigotry, racism, intolerance, hatred…a la bills 22, 178, 101…nice eh? These are the facts folks, you may not like them but it’s the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Funny that you should publish this TODAY - on the very day Quebec parliament voted unanimously to Quebec's right to declare poverty.

      That is just so utterly infuriating.

      Spoiled, parasitic leeches. Wow.

      Delete
    2. Here you go Troy: http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201310/23/01-4702768-loi-99-motion-adoptee-a-lunanimite-a-quebec.php?utm_categorieinterne=trafficdrivers&utm_contenuinterne=cyberpresse_BO2_quebec_canada_178_accueil_POS2

      Delete
    3. I thought the "rights to declare poverty" was serious, not sarcastic. Never mind, then. Thank you anyway.

      Delete
    4. all the maritimes received way more than their share of the population. much more than quebec did actually. i kinda had a feeling the canadian scam originated in prince edward island...

      Delete
    5. If the figures JW presented above are correct, Canada should have it's own referendum, regardless if Quebec has one or not eventually. The ROC should decide if it wants to keep paying for a province that costs that much and brings nothing to the table. Objectively speaking, why should they? If I lived in Alberta, I would demand my province cut Quebec off ASAP...to hell with that..seriously, what's the point and why haven't they revolted already? Logically, I would understand why Quebec should fight to stay in, I cannot understand why the other provinces haven't fought to eject it by now....

      Delete
    6. @student

      So that's all you got mate? James Wolfe just produced a very detailed and elaborate report on where the collective's money is being directed and you can't produce any form of argument against it beyond that.

      Every year, you take shitloads of our money and then you have the nerve to pop-up on this blog and bash us?

      To all the commentors here who told me not to engage the seps (yes, even grouchy old Ed), I understand. I can't promise I'll be able to totally abstain from responding, but after seeing how weak and pathetic student's answer to Wolfe's telling report, I see you guys are right.

      ...and they know we're right for being angry as hell. But I still can't believe we're subsidizing this hatred towards us.

      Delete
    7. @Sylvain - Even Ed answered the troll yesterday (I think it was yesterday) - every once in awhile we get to the point where we have to shoot back - not to worry about it. They are definitely a pain in the ass - two more than the others. We are angry as hell and this is one way we have of expressing it. Bunch of narcissistic bastards.

      Delete
    8. "Every year, you take shitloads of our money..."

      Désolé de vous apprendre que c'est notre argent,pas le vôtre.

      Delete
    9. @ S.R.

      I'm sure you tell the welfare office that every month, eh? mdr!

      Delete
    10. If Prince-Edouard-Island had received the same amount of equalization that Québec received, what would be the amount of equalization per capita?

      Delete
    11. I'm not sure what these numbers are ever supposed to prove. As a province which is poorer than the national average yet very populous, it will of course receive the lion share of the equalization payments, unless the equalization payment formula is doctored in such a way that Quebec is singled out and receives special treatment so as to receive less equalization than their income and population would otherwise allow.

      Delete
    12. @sylvain raciste

      "So that's all you got mate?"

      no it's not, but it's important to push reasonings one small step at a time with you.

      as pei and other maritime provinces received way way more than quebec per capita, they must be the real puppet masters according to your theory right?

      Delete
    13. @yannick

      "I'm not sure what these numbers are ever supposed to prove."

      i think these numbers are posted to rile up anti-intellectuals against quebec. what for? pure racism i guess. it exists, unfortunately.

      try this: type "These people are the most racist, bigoted, corrupt, xenophobic people in all of North America" in google, with the quotation marks.

      you'll see the list of websites where james wolfe pastes his crap all day every day: mcleans, wsj, huffington post, nodogsoranglophones, youtube and many many more.

      it's clear our mate is not interested in the discussion and uses the editor's generosity to pursue his hate mongering mission. toxic stuff.

      Delete
  16. Ah they seem to have changed their minds. Surprise.

    http://www.cjad.com/CJADLocalNews/entry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10605451

    ReplyDelete
  17. Either way, the PQ has boxed itself in.

    I can admit it holds the present election advantage right now.

    1. The charter debate appears to weigh in their favor
    2. The Bill 99 debate does the federalist side no favors

    But here's the kicker - if they hold out any longer, they'll be forced to produce their bilan economique.

    Anyone with half a brain knows what'll happen when that document comes to light.

    Either way they're screwed.

    Even with EVERYTHING in their favor right now - the best the can hope for is another minority government, which can be toppled within another year from now.

    Yet if they wait...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you forgot the upac and porter factors. maybe the pq prefers to wait for certain things to unfold and go for a proper kill.

      Delete
    2. The UPAC meetings ended with a whimper, all that it amounted to was 4 doners being fined for contributing too much and Porter will be long dead before he stands trial or says anything even if does have anything to say, so if the PQ is waiting for that stuff to blow in their direction they'll be waiting for quite some time. Based on their flip flopping on practically every issue since they came to power you attribute far too much forethought to the PQ.

      Delete
    3. @thatguy

      "The UPAC meetings ended with a whimper..."

      ?? the upac "meetings" (i think arrests would be a better term) have not ended at all mate. don't you follow current affairs?

      "...Porter will be long dead before he stands trial or says anything..."

      or so you hope. that's a sad hope you have there mate.

      Delete
    4. UPAC met with two Liberal MNAs and no one was arrested. They have since my posting met with the former education minister, but again nothing has come of that and to assume it will is pure speculation.

      I never said I hope Porter does before he stands trial, don't try and out words into others mouths, it's unseemly in a debate. That said Porter bamboozeled his previous employers in the states and has fooled a lot of people, jumping from the man is a con artist to the conclusion that the Liberals were collaborating with him is quite a leap.

      If the PQs only move in it's bag is to hope UPAC turns up some dirt on the other party instead of say, competent governance and addressing the problems facing the province instead of distractionary pet projects, they are in serious trouble, and so is this province.

      Delete
  18. http://www.cjad.com/CJADLocalNews/entry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10605427

    "Parti Québécois ministers say they see no issue with the fact that Pierre Karl Peladeau is a registered lobbyist for Quebecor."

    Of course not. However from what we have learned at the Charbonneau commission is that the Quebec education system has been lacking in explaining to children what a conflict of interest is.

    Every single person (99% that are graduates of the Quebec education system) got up and said "I didn;t see a problem with that relationship" or versions of that over and OVER day after day.

    Maybe just maybe the problem is with the Quebec culture that says these relationships are ok.

    Imagine the ourcry is Harper and his people had a registered lobbyist of any kind hanging out in their meetings and knowing and shaping what the future of Quebec will look like.

    At the same time owning one of the top 10 companies in Quebec. And in another nod to sensitivity no less, is the MAJOR media holder in the province.

    So that's like Harper getting Conrad Black into his meetings. That is the comparison. The NDP would not be able to stop talking. Somebody would file charges if it continued.

    Y makes total sense and passes all conflict tests IN QUEBEC!

    Is there anything morally wrong to a PQ Quebecers?

    Charter of values arn;t wrong
    telling people to change their "mother tongue" isn;t wrong
    most wealthy biz owner in the province and lobbyist is inside unelected person at cabinet meetings isn;t wrong

    These are the people in your neighborhood that the govt wants as citizens instead of you.

    Seriously we are so doomed. Thankfully all of the people reading this blog except for the paid PQ trolls know english and can move out of Quebec before they get rounded up into camps or put on a lower food ration then the pure laine.

    Quebec can borrow all the great leaders ideas. Fences to keep the people in and visitors out. Camps for political prisoners. Food shortages (buy local, wink wink). Fuel shortages. Proper control of media. Minimum prices on books. Municipal water breakdowns.

    It's an exciting time ahead if PQ Quebecers can handle going without Montreal and the parts that want to stay in the first world.


    ReplyDelete
  19. PQ minister Lisee compares the Liberals supporting Quebecs right to self governance, but taking the stance that Bill 99 should have never have passed as it was a flawed bill that would inevitably lead to a court challenge, to someone blaming a rape victim. Mr Lisee is clearly losing the last of his marbles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hyperbole =typical war cry from the seps.

      Delete
    2. where did you get that from mate?

      Delete
    3. Straight from Lisee's mouth, CBC Montreal News tonight (23rd) during the 6 Pm broadcast. They had a clip of Lisee saying it and saying "oh well look at the length of her skirt" as an example, and then cbc ended with a clip of Couillard saying Lisee should respect his opponents. http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/Montreal/ID/2414063431/

      Here I thought he couldn't get any crazier after his last insane outburst (http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Montreal+mayoral+candidates+have+mandate+oppose+charter/9023415/story.html), the poor man is becoming unhinged.

      Delete
    4. Snakes usually do ...come unhindged, especially if they sense the're in danger. Lol

      Delete
  20. FROM ED
    Keep in mind the results of the CROP poll show Montreal Island mainly against the PQ bullshit but that does not include the suburbs whitch are mainly for theb PQ. When you talk about Mtl. going Fereral which Montreal are you expecting to stay Canadian.
    I repeat that Harper nagging the PQ is dangeous to our cause. Again, I don't care what the Liberals did in the past, they are our only hope. Bill 99 is bugger all. It will be gone with the PQ. What I do Know is that when Liberals were in power we lived good. To hell with bill this and bill that. They helped the French Majority and it was what the Libs had to do to survive. There has been no difficultie living under PQ or PLQ until one year ago. That's what we're fighting, the Government of pauline Marois, not the governments of the last 40 years. This is our war zone If Harper gives the Francophones enough to get riled up we may have a majority PQ government for the next four years. If that's what you want, keep blaming the Liberals and cheering Harper and may the farts be with us. Ed

    ReplyDelete
  21. Well Mr. Cote wants a say in the language issue for Montreal - that's a switch - guess Harel is on her own:
    http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/C%C3%B4t%C3%A9+says+wants+city+involved+managing+language+question/9073987/story.html

    ReplyDelete
  22. Remember who recognized Quebec as a nation in 2006? Yup it was Harper.
    Remember who in the Reform Party want more autonomy for provinces and was proponent of 50%+1? Yup it was Harper.

    Conservatives and the NDP are incoherent on National Unity
    .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLkJbcW33rE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. why did you lump up ndp in your conclusion when all your examples are about the cons?

      Delete
    2. The editor posted the details concerning the NDP's Sherbrooke declaration, move the page up and read it. The NDP are also guilty of double-speak when saying ONE thing in English then saying SOMETHING else in French. Bilinguals like me pick up on the NDP's and the Conseravtives' double-speak.
      http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8PwyLVW-HFE/UmbHEhcO3pI/AAAAAAAAM9Y/m_Ee34_Zzi0/s1600/141tfgx.jpg

      Delete
    3. Granted the NDP supported the clarity act in 1999, but since 2005 they decided 50 + 1 is enough and have stuck to that, so I don't see what is inconsistent. The problem mostly comes from how vague the clarity act is, all it states is that there needs to be a clear majority to start proceedings, so to the NDP 51% could be a clear majority and to the Liberals 70% is a clear majority, in that way they are consistent in supporting the clarity act and advocating 51%, they've had the same policy and have been slammed for it by a lot of parts of Canada for 8 years.

      The problem is that the Sherbrooke declaration, the clarity act and bill 99 are mostly composed of a lot of writing with not very much of substance being said, there's a lot of wiggle room to move around and nothing concrete so they can be interpreted in different ways. It's a much bigger problem when it comes to laws, you need to be specific otherwise you'll inevitably need to ask a higher court to interpret it and possibly send it back to the parliament to change it to something that can actually be enforced.

      Delete
    4. @phil s

      "The NDP are also guilty of double-speak when saying ONE thing in English then saying SOMETHING else in French."

      can you provide examples of this?

      Delete
    5. @that guy

      Precisely, you hit the problem on the nail. A bunch of documents, not much clarity. What is a "clear majority" in the clarity act?

      Everyone was kind of hoping the problem would go away on its own if we ignored it, but that's not what the PQ and the Cons want now, apparently.

      Delete
    6. @Phil:

      In 2011 the cons ran under "Here for Canada" in the ROC and Montreal, and under "Notre Région au Pouvoir!" in the RoQ. Duplicitous much?

      Delete
    7. To me, 50+1% is an acceptable majority that should get Ottawa to negotiate, while the 2 questions below are not clear and Ottawa should not negotiate even if 90% is reached on either one of them:


      "Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?"

      "The Government of Quebec has made public its proposal to negotiate a new agreement with the rest of Canada, based on the equality of nations; this agreement would enable Quebec to acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish relations abroad — in other words, sovereignty — and at the same time to maintain with Canada an economic association including a common currency; any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum; on these terms, do you give the Government of Quebec the mandate to negotiate the proposed agreement between Quebec and Canada?"

      Delete
    8. 50+1% on "Should Quebec become an independent country, Yes/No" is all that's needed.

      That all successive Quebec governments argue ferociously for the right to tinker with the question is rather telling.

      Delete
    9. adski,

      Like I wrote many times before, compare the Quebec independence questions with the ones from East Timor and South Sudan.

      East Timor:

      Do you accept the proposed special autonomy for East Timor within the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia? (21.5%)
      Do you reject the proposed special autonomy for East Timor, leading to East Timor's separation from Indonesia? (78..5%)

      South Sudan:

      Separation (98.83%)
      Unity (1.17%)

      Now, the PQ has done not one, but two referenda. Which other territory gets two tries at independence referendum? On both referenda they used convoluted question that actually never address independence directly. Even then, the results for their side never even get to 50%. And that with francophones comprise 80% of the population of the Province.

      Therefore, I can say confidently that Quebec is actually not serious in getting its independence.

      Delete
    10. @ adski

      While I support Stephane Dion's Clarity Act, I think the most important part of it is the referendum question, as you mentioned. To a straight question such as the one you proposed, I would agree to a 50%+1 vote, mostly because if not,
      it would give added ammunition to separatists that federalists were not being fair.

      That being said, 50%+1 is not a clear majority, with rejection of valid NO ballots being possible, as happenned in the 1995 referendum. In my opinion, 55% is a clear majority, which would take rejected ballots in the account. That, of course, is just my opinion.

      As well, this being Quebec, on a Monday support for sovereignty could be at 50%+1 because the population is whipped into a frenzy during a referendum campaign, while on Tues it could be down to 45%.

      And looking at the global picture, 50%+1 is hardly a ringing endorsement of sovereignty in which to start a new country. If Canada was such a poor country, support would be at 80% or more.

      Delete
    11. * which would take rejected ballots INTO account.

      Delete
    12. @Troy,

      Scotland wanted to ask: "Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?" After consultations with London, the SNP agreed to amend it as to make it even clearer: "Should Scotland be an independent country?"

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-21245701


      Now, compare the clarity of the question and the willingness to have it all smoothed out with London before the referendum, with Quebec's nonsense on the subject of the question and QC's belligerence towards even discussing the question with Ottawa.

      Quebec wants to ask a question on which Ottawa has no say, a question hinting at all kinds of ties with Canada, and the next day it wants to have Ottawa at the negotiation table discussing it as if the 50+1% was obtained on "Should Quebec be an independent country?"

      The "sovereignist" movement of Quebec is a mickey mouse operation that puts the very idea of sovereignty to shame.

      It is a circus, a total joke, a game that immature Quebec elites play at the taxpayer's expense. Just look at the 1980 question and tell me that this whole thing isn't a joke.

      Delete
    13. "on a Monday support for sovereignty could be at 50%+1 because the population is whipped into a frenzy during a referendum campaign, while on Tues it could be down to 45%."

      True. People can whipped into a short-lived frenzy, but worse yet they can be propagandized into supporting long-lived unethical laws. Then the government goes: "this is the will of the majority".

      My beef with Quebec has always been more with their laws, less with their desire to have a state. The only problem I have with them wanting a state is that it looks like it can be achieved only through trickery. But if they ever vote Yes on a clear question, I won't have a problem with it, as long as the question sticks to the point, the campaign is fair, and the votes are not rigged.

      If they can show me that this is something that they really want, and that it is clearly what they want, that their elites are willing to put a clear question forward, and the people can back the question with a resounding Yes, then how can I not respect that?

      But if they continue dicking around like they have been to date, with their sovereignty-association schemes and the never-ending reliance on 101, then they are just a waste of time.

      Delete
    14. Very well stated guys - I don't think any of us could argue with the above but we still have the partition problem. Many distinct areas of quebec do not wish to separate from Canada no matter what the outcome of the above may be and borders, including those of the natives, would still have to be negotiated with the ROC. There is also the law of contiguous borders for the ROC.

      Delete
    15. Enough with this partition nonsense already.

      Delete
    16. Sorry adski but that's what is important to me. Our area has absolutely no interest in being part of a separate quebec and would be vacated so quickly their heads would swim. That would be our only chance of survival. Don't know where you live, but this is of vital importance to our area of quebec. The natives have already made their point clear so partition of the province will take place.

      Delete
    17. Let me explore that point further.

      People with French as their mother tongue (francophones) make up around 80% of Quebec population. In 1995 that number was even higher. If only 63% of francophones voted for YES, more than 50% would be on the YES side, even if completely 100% of non-francophones went to vote and voted NO. If clear majority is customarily defined as 2/3 (66.67%), then that required number is still even less than clear majority for francophone voters.

      So I can not and do not understand why Parizeau and other separatists like to blame ethnic or cultural communities. Why did they not blame francophones? The simple fact is that more francophones voted NO than all anglo- and allophones voted NO.

      If being part of Canada was such a bad deal for Quebec, particularly its francophone population, why could they not get the number like East Timor above among themselves to vote YES?

      Delete
    18. To cut even remotely close to reality, Parizeau should have pointed out that they lost because of ethnic vote, anglo vote, and 40% of franco vote. He would have left out the money since the Oui side was also bankrolled by some interests, and he would have not reduced the No voters to just one of 3 subgroups that comprised the No vote.

      If he was even more honest, he might have gone even further to discuss why this ethnic vote voted No so overwhelmingly. If he did that, he might have come to some uncomfortable conclusions about the movement he led and supports to this day in his senile years.

      But instead, he simplified the whole affaire in a jingoistic way so fitting to the movement he was leading. He gave the Julie Snyders in the crowd what they wanted to hear, and the view of reality they need as much as air.

      Delete
    19. Partition is a superfluous idea. In an event of a clean vote on a clear question, partition would be illegitimate. In an event of an immediate decalration of independece if the vote was on soveregnty folliwing a pact with Canada, few countries would recognize Quebec, including Canada.

      The issue of partition is a great feed for the trolls who can take the conversion in a different direction, like discussing feasibility and legality of it. And you always stick that point in even when it doesn't apply.

      Delete
    20. There are many adski that do not feel that partition, in any event, would be illegitimate. It is a viable solution to thousands of us and the movement grows all the time. We are not at all interested in remaining part of a country called quebec and want our rights to remain Canadian to be respected just as much or more than the separatists demand that their rights be respected.

      Delete
    21. @cutie003

      "We are not at all interested in remaining part of a country called quebec..."

      well then maybe the best thing for you would be to move to canada. i think you'd be happier there. amongst your conationals.

      Delete
  23. The following is my response to James Wolfe from this morning at 10:10:00 AM:

    Bang on JW! Actually, there is a YouTube with Ezra Levant of Sun TV doing acommentary on this exact subject. Actually, the segment I was looking for seemingly has been removed from YouTube, but this one is more recent, so it makes the point eloquently and succinctly.

    I sent a case study Harper on this along with a number of newspapers including the Suburban. Interestingly, Beryl Wajsman, the Suburban Editor, left me a phone message on this, I phoned him back twice and he never got back to me, because this editorial describes EXACTLY what I asked Harper to do, i.e., eliminate equalization payments to Quebec, and why not?

    Quebec has systematically made the free usage of one of Canada's official languages against the law, harassed small businesses over language for the most minute of violations, barely hires those not of its ilk in the public sector, and otherwise promoted its own people over the minorities despite the fact the minorities, 20% of the population, have enough initiative to create 40% of the economic activity.

    This sewage of a government in just over one year is responsible for the loss of 50,000 jobs, and this sewage of a government is now "promising" to create 40,000 jobs with its initiatives over how many years? In the meantime, to be sure, more jobs will be lost, so no matter how few jobs they create, the bloodletting will exceed anything this government did, does and will do.

    They snub their noses at the real Canada's pluralistic values, they see Canada as their piggy bank and good for nothing else, and this preservation-of-language-and-culture fertilizer they have been spreading since the Quiet Revolution is just a bloody red herring, and nothing more. French won't die because the majority of the inhabitants WANT to speak French, and that's enough to keep it alive. The Hebrew language in Israel is a perfect model of how language survives because Israel brought Hebrew back from a strictly scriptural language not spoken on earth for over 2,000 years.

    I heartily endorse what Harper is doing "Quebecwise" and I'm fine with Quebec and its gangrene being removed from Canada, if this is the result of how he handles the real Canada and the economy. I could stand an instant $10 billion saving from the net outflow of equalization. That could eliminate the federal deficit in one fell swoop.

    If separation is the result of all this, then so be it. Good-bye, good luck and good riddance. I'm only embarrassed I was born and raised in Quebec, but I have renounced my association with Quebec as best I could. What is really irksome in my case is the gangrene has already spread to Ontario <-----[Click on the brown print to see how]. Actually, here's another example of the gangrene in Ontario with a very special guest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...but I have renounced my association with Quebec as best I could."

      try harder mate. your non stop quebec bashing proves the opposite.

      Delete
    2. Good one and bang on Mr. Sauga.

      Delete
  24. Looks like the wind in the PQ sails has subsided..LOLOLOLOLOL...cutie, popo has backed down LOLOLOLOLOL, loved to watch the minister for Anglo Mtl absolutely blue in the face because of it, in the news tonight...LOLOLOLOLOL, sweet dreams seppies, hahahahaha...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See the Sun News report with Beryl on the feds intervening in the Bill 99 debate:

      http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/2764737995001

      RULE OF LAW FOLKS!

      Delete
    2. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTThursday, October 24, 2013 at 5:24:00 PM EDT

      This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. Do you really wonder why these comments are redacted.
      They are gratuitous insults.

      Delete
    4. FROM ED
      Une gars reminds me of the Fox and the Grapes from the Fables of Aesop we used to read as kids in the old time encyclopedias. The Fox couldn't get the grapes so he concluded they were probably sour anyway.
      “IT IS EASY TO DESPISE WHAT YOU CANNOT GET.” was the moral. Have sympathy for Une Gar, he is low mentality like all the framcophones and vindictive like Marois, Harel erc Heb didn't have encyclopedias to read as a boy a because his French Father thought it was a greek word for bicycle. He is angry because the only ones he can match intelligence with are the trolls and even they despise him. Ed

      Delete
    5. @ed

      "...he is low mentality like all the framcophones..."

      now here's a comment that's to be deleted for blatant racism. shame on you (again) ed. you don't deserve to participate in this blog.

      Delete
  25. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTThursday, October 24, 2013 at 5:45:00 PM EDT

    @ Editor:
    Your blog sucks anyway. Enjoy your mediocre life (or what's left of it) in a province you deeply hate.
    I'll find a better site to laugh at losers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You've made that "threat" for months now, just take your lazy insults and leave already, much like your real life leaving, nary a tear will be shed for your departure.

      Delete
    2. @tacky parvenu

      which site do you think is more suited to laugh at losers mate?

      Delete
  26. Blatantly breaks the law, writes a book about it and wants to be rewarded with the job of mayor of Montreal. Good luck with that.

    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/montreal/201012/04/01-4349203-michel-brule-oui-jai-rencontre-des-prostituees.php

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've read Sartre, Baudelaire, Celine, and Dostoevsky as well but it didn't take me 8 years and didn't give me the urge to go get prostitutes..but I guess when you can't get it any other way....Can't say I'm intimately familiar with the law on the subject but isn't prostitution legal in Canada it's just soliciting that isn't? Honestly this is probably the least distasteful/crazy thing he's said (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-mayoral-candidate-addresses-anglo-egocentricity-1.2224385), it truly is so odd that he is only attracting 2% of the vote.

      Delete
  27. L'UPAC enquête au ministère de l'Éducation

    http://tvanouvelles.ca/lcn/infos/national/archives/2013/10/20131024-173604.html

    L'interminable série noire continue ...

    ReplyDelete
  28. Blogwriter: I can tell that you don't have any legal training to judge whether or not Bill 99 is constitutional. Your opinion on what you *think* the constitution says or what the law means frankly isn't worth anything. Just like my opinion on whether or not you have cancer is worthless because I'm not a doctor.

    I AM a lawyer, and I'm going to tell you exactly what the court will say: Bill 99 is constitutional because it was very carefully written. BIll 99 says:

    - the Quebec people exercises its will through political institutions (true)
    - the Quebec National Assembly is one of Quebec's political institutions (true)
    - no other Parliament can unilaterally reduce the powers that the National Assembly has under the constitution (true)
    - the Quebec National Assembly can hold a referendum on anything it feels like (true)
    - The Quebec National Assembly can establish the rules of any referendum that it organizes (true)

    That's all that Bill 99 says. It doesn't say that the Quebec National Assembly can unilaterally declare independence, or that referendums held in a province are binding on anyone or anything. Bill 99 says nothing that Keith Henderson alleges that it says, so he has no case.

    ReplyDelete