Friday, October 12, 2018

Is François Legault Quebec's Donald Trump?


I must say I'm taken a bit aback by the aberrant behaviour of the newly minted CAQ Premier of Quebec who unleashed a surprisingly aggressive political attitude right off the bat of his election, something that was hitherto unseen.

Throughout the campaign Legault portrayed himself as a safe, capable and comfortable politician, but his demeanour changed rapidly upon victory.

It's rather disturbing because not only are his first announced priorities inflammatory, but also ill-thought-out, as if he is excitedly shooting from the hip, like someone who's waited patiently outside the nightclub in an eternal queue only to go immediately crazy on the dance floor, once let in.

Was the whole 'I am a federalist, friend of the Anglos," nothing but a sinister ploy?'
Is Legault really a wolf in sheep's clothing, like a burlesque villain in a Marvel comic who rips off a false mask to reveal a nasty and sneering face, a triumphant scoundrel exposed once he has wormed himself into our confidence?

I'm not so sure it isn't true, and its a bit scary.

Not only are his priorities suspect, but he is displaying a tenuous grasp of the realities and limits of government, the law and the consequences of his proposals, acting very similar to Donald Trump who shoots first and asks questions later,

Let me say how disappointed I am, that even before he is sworn in as Premier he told his first political lie, actually two.
"The crucifix hanging in Quebec's National Assembly is a historical symbol, not a religious one, even though it represents the Christian values of the province's two colonial ancestors, premier-designate François Legault said Thursday."
Really, only a Donald Trump type character could dare come up with that nose-stretcher, that a depiction of Jesus on the cross under the motto of 'INRI' (signifying that a true Christian lies here)  is not a religious symbol.
The second lie he told is that the crucifix and the Quebec flag references historical Catholic AND Protestant influence on Quebec, are an utterly blatant lie.
"We have a cross on our flag. I think that we have to understand that our past, we had Protestants, Catholics, they built the values we have in Quebec. François Legault said Thursday."
Is Legault  actually pedalling the falsehood that Premier Maurice Duplessis installed the crucifix in the National Assembly to honour Protestant contributions to Quebec as well as Catholic, rather than to underline Quebec's holy commitment to state Catholicism?

When Duplessis and the infamous Abbé Lionel Groulx sat down in 1948 to create a distinctive Quebec flag, do you think they were honouring the contribution of Quebec Protestants in creating the modern Fleur-de-Lys flag.
Not only an absurd idea, but a patent lie.
Congratulations Mr Legault, in the vernacular of the vulgar, as Premier-elect you've broken your cherry of truthfulness.

As for his promise to reduce immigration from 50,000 per year to 40,000, he is actually shooting Quebec in the foot.
There is no way Justin Trudeau will lower the current level of Immigration from 300,000 to 290,000 to accommodate Legault, those immigrants will just go to the rest of Canada with painful effect.
Given that about 20% of the current 50,000 immigrants Quebec receives each year skedaddle out of Quebec to greener pastures in other provinces, the effect of the demographic loss will be amplified.

Let us do some math.
Canada accepts 300,000 immigrants of which (under Legault) 40,000 will come to Quebec, of which 8,000 will move away to other provinces.
That means that in ten years English Canada will grow by 2,700,000 people and Quebec will grow by 320,000 or just 12% of the immigrants.
By reducing immigration to Quebec, Legault will be exacerbating an already bad situation where Quebec's proportion of Canada's population is shrinking.

As for kicking out immigrants who don't adopt, I can't think of a stupider idea politically.
Imagine the photo op of those poor rejected shlubs with packed bags and crying children being trundling onto a flight out of Quebec like a criminal deportee.
More likely they will be accepted like heroes at the Ontario border with an enthusiastic welcome, another disastrous photo op for Quebec.

As for banning religious headgear, Legault has charged full-steam ahead into shark-infested waters. Telling us that he'll ban religious regalia for public employees in positions of power, he has forgotten or never understood that he cannot tell judges what or what not to wear and he cannot invoke the notwithstanding clause against the courts which are independent.
As for people in positions of power being banned from wearing religious symbols, he has said that it will include judges, policemen, prison guards and teachers in the public system.
Suspiciously absent is politicians from his list because banning an elected official from serving would be a United Nations human rights disaster.

At any rate, Legault is lurching forward and backward, now offering a grandfather clause to those already in the system. The idea of some teacher in a hijab being escorted out of a school by police, perhaps too much of a political disaster to anticipate.

Being Premier is no easy task and there are few easy solutions to complex situations where the interests of all Quebecers must be balanced.

I hope Legault's early blunders serve him as a wake-up call that he hasn't got the cat by the tail and that good governing is a lot more complicated than he anticipated.

But I'm not getting a good vibe, his nasty statement that Quebec is a nation and can decide for itself without consideration that it is a Canadian entity is troubling because he gave opposite signals during the election campaign.

I like the quality of the potential cabinet members from which he will pull together and I hope they will serve to calm down Legault's impetuous nature and perhaps convince him to get off the dance floor until he has learned some better moves.

18 comments:

  1. Quebec seems to have perfected the art of vomiting->eat the vomit->repeat. That this Legault clown promised he'd expel undesirable minorities in the first place (i.e., those who are not Québécois de veuille souche or Old Stock - White, Roman Catholic, French mother-tongued, and several generations of those first three criteria) doesn't hold water. Only the federal government can expel, and that's not so easy. It took a whole 45 years to expel holocaust denier Ernst Zundel, and that's only because he screwed up and his visa (never became a citizen of Canada, thankfully) expire while he was in the U.S. promulgating his anti-Semitic views.

    If Quebec wants to shrink its population, so much the better. The Old Stock hasn't been getting busy enough in the bedroom to sustain its base, so every idiotic step against minorities Quebec takes will tighten its noose a little more each time.

    Montreal is right now benefiting from exorbitantly expensive housing in Toronto as a less viable alternative except for those who come with money, money, money. Somewhere along the way, I envisage wealthy foreigners who need places to park their money will do to Montreal what they have already done to Vancouver, Toronto, and even in Calgary. Think they're going to adapt to "The Quebec Way"? Not even when pigs could fly! If there is a big influx, what is Quebec going to do?

    Oh, I know some readers will think about how Quebec has jurisdiction over its own immigrants. WRONG!
    What's to stop them from landing outside Quebec (read Toronto, maybe Ottawa) and ♪ merrily merrily merrily merrily ♫ drive over the border. I don't see it happening on a grand scale à la Toronto, New York and Vancouver as Montreal has nowhere near the money those other urban centers do, but with over half of Quebec renting rather than owning right now, it wouldn't take much to put French Quebec that much further out of the market. Right now they're looking at converting shipping containers into homes--ugh! Next they'll do the same with superannuated railway boxcars! Salut Québec, salut bien!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, I almost forgot about that insipid cross dangling over the speaker's chair. If I had the chance, I'd rip it off that wall and throw it across the Assembly room, but in showing some respect, it should be removed carefully and put in a display case within the confines of the Assembly building for tourists to see. That's as far as its historic significance goes, esp. if they want to take religion out of society.

      Delete
  2. The PSBGM and other mostly English school boards (under the old system, pre Bill 22) used to be the "refuge" for any immigrants' children. We welcomed all (including the children of francophones) with open arms.

    Mr. Legault, we would be more than happy to be the dustbin of all the undesireables' children you don't want sullying the purity of the francophone schools. Send them to us!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ironically, the cross in the National Assembly that hangs over the Speaker's Chair guarantees for all time the diversity that Legault shuns. Jesus's presence ensures that there will always be one Jew in the National Assembly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Philip writes:

    "But I'm not getting a good vibe, (Legault's) nasty statement that Quebec is a nation and can decide for itself without consideration that it is a Canadian entity is troubling because he gave opposite signals during the election campaign."

    1) How nasty can it be, Philip? "Quebec is a nation" is not that far off from "That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada." And we all know who said that. So, not to worry, this is as politically correct as one can get. It is only a natural evolution from Bourassa's statement in the wake of the failure of Meech Lake back in the early '90s that Quebec is a distinct society and despite language to that effect not being entrenched in the constitution he will always govern as if it was.

    Distinct society --> the people of Quebec constitute a nation --> Quebec is a nation --> Quebec is a de facto nation --> Quebec is de jure a nation.

    Slippin' and a slidin' down the slope...right into independence.

    2) Quebec may be a nation but come time to queue up for the yearly equalization booty and -- Presto! -- Quebec will magically morph right back into a mere province just like all the others. You see, it has to because the constitution does not provide for equalization payments to distinct societies or nations but only for provinces. But fear not, once the cheque has cleared, Quebec will magically morph right back into a nation. It's what I call the Evelyn Mulray Syndrome. You know, from the movie Chinatown when Jack Nicholson slaps Faye Dunaway as she switches between being the mystery girl's sister and mother: "I'm her sister, I'm her mother." Quebec does this two-step to perfection...all the way to the bank.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is actually very easy to spot Legault's lie. The crucifix in the National Assembly has the likeness of Jesus Christ on it. That is distinctly Catholic cross. Protestant cross does not have Jesus on it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As I said in an earlier post I am much less comfortable with Francois Legault than I was a few years ago. It is possible that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing although I tend to think not but we will see.
    I think he was playing towards the nationalist francophone vote somewhat hence his musings about cutting immigration. On the other hand I actually think it wouldnt be a bad idea at this point to reduce the numbers somewhat as there is no more space in the school system in Montreal to handle additional immigrant children..that is the french school system. And believe me polticians wont allow the english school boards to take on any as that would enrage the francophone vote. So as it stands there just isnt enough room to properly accomodate many of the immigrants children.

    The idea of banning religion symbols..I think again pandering to the nationalist vote but dont really sense Legault is 100 percent behind that. I know people here are going up and down about the crucifix but this country was founded by christians and christian values so I see no problem with his historical argument. I am getting a little sick and tired of immigrants coming here and then whining about any mention of christianity..we already have holiday trees and holiday trains because of this which I find quite offensive.

    I like the fact that Legault is a businessman so that should be good news for the economy and for our onerous taxes and regulations.

    I still have some hope that Legault will turn out to be a decent premier but will be watching him closely over the next year or so and see how things evolve. I think the Liberals clearly deserved to be punished after all their scandals and also their indifference to the anglo community.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nonsense... not one immigrant has ever come here and whined about Christianity, complained about Christmas, Christmas trees, or anything of the like. The only people who ever worry about/invent this imaginary problem are non-immigrants. Pure drivel, complicated.

      Delete
    2. Not one immigrant..wow you have spoken to each and every immigrant that has entered our country..you are a busy man. It seems there is a pretty high correlation to the number of non-Christian immigrants pouring into this country over the past few decades with the censorship of words like Christmas. But there is also the homegrown effect of the weakening grip of christianity on the population as a whole.
      My main point is that we are busting at the seams here in Montreal..the schools cant handle all the new students..so why are we bending over backwards letting in so many people. I am sure cutting the numbers to 40000 will not devastate the economy..I think we are due for a good recession within a year or so anyway hence by then the unemployment rate will be high again.

      Delete
  7. Come on now editor, just a few months ago you made a post with the title "Why Anglos Should Welcome CAQ Victory", in which you actually point out that the CAQ had abandoned their nationalist policies. What happened to that?

    It's going to be a long four years. People seem to think that the CAQ will be good for the economy, but all the conflict they will create with Ottawa, to artificially rekindle the separatist movement, definitely won't help.

    We'll also be stuck with conservative social policies, environmental neglect, and institutional racism in the name of "protecting our culture".

    Honestly a PQ government would have been better, at least they don't pretend to be something they're not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stump: "PQ government would have been better..."? Uhhhhh...really? REALLY? First of all, Lisée already abandoned the separatism business, at least for this election...at least that's what he said, but had the seppies riled up enough in this mandate, he'd be right there with a snap referendum for sure. He wouldn't let an opportunity at the split go to waste. He has (had) as much a visceral hard-on hatred for everything not Québécois de vieuille souche that he would have done whatever he could, probably even unconstitutionally, to oppress minorities, especially that of English speakers. No, Stump, a PQ government would NOT have been better...not by a damn longshot!

      Delete
  8. Let's just say that English, Montreal, and English Montreal are going to be at the absolute top of his hit list. He's already shown that he talks out of both sides of his mouth at once (just Google him and Gilles Proulx in the same search window) and won't hesitate to unleash the cars into the metropolis the instant the chance presents itself.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well would you blame Legault for ignoring Montreal..practically nobody in Montreal voted for him. I would ignore Montreal too. I honestly think if Montreal had voted in a few more CAQ candidates that the CAQ would have tried to do something for the city but once again everyone votes Lieberal even though the Lieberals do next to nothing for the anglo community plus all the corruption scandals..it was high time for the Liberals to go.

    Hopefully the CAQ will not do more than ignore Montreal..we shall see..I am still a bit hopeful that Legault may not turn out so bad after all but we will see how he does over the next year or so. The bottom line is all the parties..even the Liberals try to look tough against Ottawa..and ignore or reduce anglo rights even more..and so on.

    I personally find it embarrassing that Montrealers politically always do the same thing..vote Liberal. In the west island you have a 32 year old Liberal who just got handed his dads previous seat on a silver platter..and everyone still votes massively for this guy who has next to no real world job experience..even less than our prime minister. This guy also was handed some psuedo bullshit posts before likely with daddys help as a policy analyst, advisor..only the Liberals would have the nerve to do something like this as they know west islanders are a bunch of sheep who would vote for anyone as long ass its a Liberal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The region of Montreal constitutes half the population of Quebec. Chew on that.

      Non-British-colonial democracies would never elect a majority government that only 37% of the population had voted for.

      Don’t forget that our electoral system s̶o̶m̶e̶h̶o̶w̶ ̶t̶o̶l̶e̶r̶a̶t̶e̶s̶ allows votes from rural ridings like the Magdalen Islands to be hugely over-represented (worth triple) compared to urban votes such as Ville St. Laurent.

      Delete
    2. Yes, A.C., and it was that woman, Manon Massé, whose face is uglier than a dirty buzzard's terdy ass, that conducted the latest electoral constituency reforms. How it happened she got the task is beyond reason and beyond me, and she slanted the constituencies about as much as is humanly possible.

      Delete
    3. @sauga

      this latest post of yours is nothing but fake news. she did not conduct the latest constituency reform. she did not get the task and she did not slant anything. please don't do it again.

      Delete
  10. I think we are all aware the current system is not very democractic for the points you just made. Having said that. its the system we have and given our silly first past the post system we often dont get what many voters asked for.
    The reality is that the CAQ won a majority which should be no big surprise as many polls have been showing this for months..and given how politics works Montreal is now on the outside looking in especially west Montreal which is pretty short sighted.

    The problem with the anglos in Montreal and is they never ever consider any other possibility other than Liberal so the Liberals take us for granted..the francophones think we are dinosaurs as we never change our point of view..and in the end you cant expect much good will from the CAQ given how little support they got from our area..its the way our political system works.

    If we were a little more open minded and elected a few CAQ politicians then we might have gotten some extra weight but now all the anglos can cringe in the corner freaking out at every word Legault says.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Comp, to address your remark "the system...our silly first past the post system we often don't get what many voters asked for."

      You're right! Now don't you forget who screwed up the promise to reform that "silly" system in his first months as PM like a massively fumbled greasy football! Don't you forget that!

      Delete