Marois' Hubby Makes Ethics Debate Toxic for PQ

Mr & Mrs Marois..' You've got some 'splainin' to do'

When the Liberals and the CAQ demanded that Pauline and her husband Claude Blanchet appear before a National Assembly committee to explain the possible 'deal' between him and the FTQ, one that was alluded to at the Charbonneau Commission, it was mostly seen as politicking and grandstanding, an effort to  humiliate the Premier while scoring some valuable political points.

" In a conversation on 20 April 2009, presented to the committee on January 21, the former president of the FTQ-Construction Jean Lavallée said that he felt it was time to talk about "our friends in PQ" to convince them not to support the idea of ​​a commission on the construction industry, then proposed by the defunct ADQ. 

Michel Arsenault then replied: "Well they are stuck , because we have a deal with Blanchet."  Link{fr}

Later on in testimony before the commission, Arsenault tried to backtrack, admitting that he thought about using pressure on Blanchet, but ultimately decided against it. Hmmm...
Making the story all the more plausible is the fact that the Union's Fond Solidarité fund made a dubious loan to Blanchet's company for some overvalued shares, a loan that was never repaid.

At any rate the incident was swept aside and half forgotten with the announcement of a provincial election, but re-surfaced with a vengeance yesterday.

With the publication of a poll showing the Liberals ahead of the PQ, it appears Marois hit the panic button and attempted to crudely shift the focus of the campaign from sovereignty and referendums, to that of ethics, which up to now, was a non-issue.

"Marois tried to get her campaign back on track Tuesday, questioning Liberal leader Philippe Couillard's ties to alleged fraudster Arthur Porter. The attack came as the latest CROP poll shows the PQ trailing the Liberals for the first time since the beginning of the election campaign.

During a news conference at a Verdun elementary school, Marois repeatedly alluded to a Le Devoir story that alleges Porter broke the law by forming a business partnership with Couillard in 2010. Porter, who was head of the McGill University Health Centre at the time, did not ask permission from the ministry of health and social services before founding a consulting firm with Couillard — a violation of provincial ethics laws.

The Liberal leader was not in provincial politics at the time, and hasn't been(sic) accused of doing anything illegal. But the PQ appears set on using his association with Porter — who is in a Panamanian prison awaiting extradition to Canada on bribery and money-laundering charges — to compare Couillard to the scandal-plagued Liberals of 2012.

"I find the Couillard's Liberals look an awful lot like Jean Charest's," Marois said, referring to the former Liberal premier. "I see Couillard had to clarify the situation (with Porter), so it worries me since he's the Liberal leader."

An investigation by The Gazette found that Porter and Couillard's consulting firm never got off the ground and was eventually dissolved." Link  

But Couillard wasn't having any of that, accusing Pauline of mudslinging and shooting back with a vicious threat of his own, one that really must have shaken Pauline quite a bit.

In a radio interview, Couillard warned Marois that if she raises questions about Liberal ethics, he will bring the issue of the Blanchet 'deal' to the table in the leaders debate on Thursday, a threat Marois would be wise to consider.

"If she wants to play in the mud, either directly or through an intermediary, that's not the kind of politics that I want to conduct. We're here to tell Quebecers how we want to govern Quebec over the next years. I would be very happy to have a debate on this level. If she wants to wade down in the mud I have about four or five questions, interesting points about the deal, among others. " Link{fr}

It's a bit strange that nobody in the media noticed that the PQ never mentioned the ethics issue before in this campaign, the issue was if you recall, the cornerstone of the PQs last election strategy.

Could it be that PQ strategists steered away from the ethics question up to now because the party was ahead in the polls and because they believed that the supposed Blanchet/FTQ  'deal' a toxic issue that any public discussion of ethics was bound to raise?

Pauline is actually more vulnerable to an ethics debate than Couillard, she clearly has more baggage.
Her loathsome husband has never really answered for his actions, at least not to the satisfaction of the public.

What evidence we do have today in the FTQ ' deal' file may not prove he's a crook, but it does show him to be an opportunist at the least, one who used his wife's political connections for personal gain.

I'll remind readers this isn't the first ethical question that has arisen over Blanchet. First was his cushy settlement that he wrung out of the government after being relieved of his duties at a government investment agency that he ran to the ground. Then there are questions about the swanky estate that he and Pauline owned, where the land was mysteriously re-zoned, ballooning the value.  Read: How estate was built on public, farm lands 

Mr. Marois attempted to silence the critics by suing the Gazette for defaming him, ultimately reaching the most asinine out-of-court settlement, one in which he tacitly admitted that the article was factual.
Read this hilarious translation of the settlement.

"The Gazette considers that it's article of September 22, 2007 on the subject didn't falsely represent the facts, but the Gazette recognizes that others could have falsely interpreted its article and that Madame Marois and Mr. Blanchet could have suffered a prejudice.

I wonder if Pauline ever considered the phrase that tells us that "People in Glass Houses, shouldn't throw stones" a modern take on the biblical passage that warns us "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone" and her  playing of the ethics card, a strategy that has every likelihood of backfiring.

I expect Marois will remain cloistered today, preparing her responses to these possible questions about her husband and the FTQ that Couillard has promised to deliver if an ethics debate is opened by Marois herself.

It's the kind of debate that cannot be won and brings to mind Richard Nixon's famous "I am not a crook" a speech that cemented most people's view that he was indeed a crook. Watch the speech

"On November 17, 1973, President Richard Nixon infamously denied any involvement in the Watergate scandal with his now timeless defence. 
Thing is, he was. Link

At any rate, it appears that up to now, the campaign couldn't go any worse for Marois, the return of the sovereignty and referendum debate a killer issue and now a possible ethics debate in the face of the unresolved issue of her husband's, and her implication in that now infamous 'deal' with the  FTQ.

For PQ boosters, it is evident that the campaign is off-kilter and yesterday, in a Journal de Montreal opinion piece, the wordy Mathieu Bock-Coté urged the PQ to get back to the wedge politics of the Charter of Values. The tried and true PQ politics of division and hate.

And so the campaign will hinge on which party manages to control the debate, be it the Charter of Values, or ethics or sovereignty and referendums.

If the PQ can't get the debate to focus on the Charter of Values, they are sunk.

So if I was a betting man, Pauline will steer clear of an ethics brawl in the leaders debate, hoping that Couillard sticks to his promise to leave Pauline alone over her husband.

Too bad.....

Péladeau Proves Money Can't Buy You Love

When Pauline dropped the bombshell that Pierre-Karl Péladeau would be joining the ranks of the PQ in order to give the party a semblance of competence in the domain of business, committed sovereigntists fell over themselves in giddy anticipation of victory, convinced that he would move fence sitters to make the jump over to the sovereignty PQ side.

Despite all the hoopla, some observers, myself included, were rather skeptical. Here's what I wrote a week ago upon the monumental announcement of the Péledeau candidacy.

"With the Quebec Liberals a lot closer in the polls than was predicted by the media of late, Péladeau will be the linchpin to an election win or loss for the PQ.
While Pauline sees Péladeau as a necessary component to election victory, she may be making a pact with the devil and the gambit could very well backfire.

 And so we find ourselves a scant week later looking at a three point Liberal lead in the polls, something that Pauline couldn't have imagined, her thinking being that the deal with the devil that she concocted would cynch her victory and she could live out the next four years as Premier of the Quebec, then retire, (turning over the reins to Péladeau) satisfied and content.

It's was a good plan, one that had a more than reasonable chance of succeeding.
But as the old Yiddish saying goes, "Men plan, God laughs"

The truth is that Péladeau was never a good fit and for most of the PQ faithful, the unionists, students, government workers, he is the antithesis of what they believe in.
For these voters,  accepting Péladeau into the fold is is strictly a question of holding one's nose and making an electoral compromise that remains hard to swallow indeed.
For some, too hard.

But for separatist militants (sovereignty at all costs,) and the PQ hierarchy, it was an easy choice, expediency over principle, that is.
That is why an old-time communist hardliner like Gilles Duceppe could accept so enthusiastically, a man who is Quebec's preeminent union buster, someone who inflicted fourteen lockouts in his various companies and a man that broke the back and destroyed the union at Le Journal de Montreal.

Now this latest poll is not definitive, in Quebec, polls never are and in the end voters may swing radically before the fateful day of reckoning on election day.

But it does indicate that Péladeau is not the panacea that Marois thought he would be and his maladroitness right off the start proves the political axiom that a successful businessman does not necessarily a successful politician make.

Péladeau's rush to establish his bone fides as a separatist was perhaps his most egregious error, re-opening up the dreaded referendum debate and putting paid to the carefully crafted PQ  plan to avoid that debate.

The unanticipated and unwelcomed re-opening of the referendum debate was about as well-received by the public as a sudden and unexpected pounding toothache, heralding the necessary but dreaded appointment with the dentist.

For Phillipe Couillard and the Liberals, this campaign has been one marked by what can only be described as uninspired, low-keyed caution, perhaps counting on the fact or hoping that the PQ would commit a strategic blunder, re-casting the dynamic.
But interestingly, perhaps it is low-keyed caution that Quebecers are looking for. Sometimes we just want a little less drama in our lives.

And so it has happened, the serendipitous turn of events and the Péladeau ineptitude has given the Liberals a lead in the polls, based solely on the toothache dynamic, the one in which even committed sovereigntists don't want a referendum, nor talk of a referendum.
Although support for sovereignty may sit at about 40%, support for holding a referendum, or even debating one is much, much lower.
This isn't a paradox, it actually makes perfect sense.

Sovereigntists realize that another failed referendum will be crushing and humiliating. It will weaken Quebec's position in its battle with Ottawa and this for another generation at least.

Considering the close vote in the last referendum, any new referendum loss will show support for sovereignty diminishing, another crushing blow to the movement.
As Canada's position on sovereignty has evolved to that of annoyed indifference, the Quebec's blackmail gambit of concessions or sovereignty has evaporated into thin air.

Nothing is for sure, the electorate remains fickle, but one thing we can deduce from the poll is that the CAQ is going down the drain to the detriment of the PQ.

Key to success: Keep up the referendum pressure

For the Liberals, it is important to keep up the pressure by hammering home the issue of referendums and sovereignty and even though Pauline's strategy is to downplay and ignore the issue, if the Liberals play their cards right, they can frighten voters into their camp.

The real disappointment in all this is the federal government, which promised to intervene in the debate if the PQ made claims or proffered assumptions about sovereignty that Ottawa disagreed with.

Well that has happened, when the PQ talked about the dollar, passports and borders, professing to tell Quebecers what will be, and how negotiations with Ottawa will win out.

I'm not saying that Harper himself should have waded in, but perhaps Denis Lebel could have fanned the flames of the sovereignty debate by scotching those nonsensical separatist assertions about the dollar and the border.
All he had to do is to tell voters that Marois and the PQ cannot make promises that presume Ottawa's hand.
That's it, the sovereignty debate relaunched!
Marois would have screamed about Ottawa's interference in a Quebec campaign, but the Conservatives could easily have told voters that it was the  PQ who started the debate......Touché!

At any rate, any discussion about sovereignty, squabbles with Ottawa and question of a future Quebec and referendum is music to Liberal ears, because voters just don't want to hear it.
Remember the Hollywood axiom that any publicity, even bad publicity is good publicity, because in the end, publicity is publicity.

To most Quebecers, the referendum and sovereignty refrain is like an annoying song that one can't get out of one's head, a song that turns voters off the PQ.
And so the Liberals should crank up th volume and inflict as much referendum and sovereignty pain as they can, because in the end it is music to Liberal ears.

It would be nice if Ottawa helped.

The Trouble with Sovereignty: Buying a Pig in a Poke

"When ye proffer the pigge, open the poke." is an idiom as old as the hills  standing the test of time, warning us to be wary of "An offering or deal that is foolishly accepted without being examined first.
By the way, a 'poke' is from the French ''poque' a sack and the phrase reminds us not to buy something sight unseen.

Now I've no problem with sovereignty as a concept for Quebec.
Self-determination is a universal right and let's face it, Quebec represents a 'distinct society'  living in a somewhat definable geographic area (we'll not discuss borders here.)

But opting for independence is a BIG step, something to be considered seriously, the consequences dramatic and irreversible.

When you are an impoverished nation, seeking independence is not much of a risk.
Take for example East Timor, one of the newest members of the family of nations. About 40% of the  population lives below the international poverty line – which means living on less than U.S. $1.25 per day and about 50% of the population is illiterate. The country sits 134th on the Human Development Index.
Not much of a risk going independent, I imagine. 

But even basket case countries with nothing to lose, sometimes actually do worse after independence.
South Sudan  is another twenty-first century example of an impoverished nation declaring independence after a referendum where an astonishing 98.83% voted in favour of independence. Unfortunately, it hasn't really worked out that well with a war of succession ravaging the country.

But in the end, one can understand that those living in these cesspools would vote for any change, considering their hopeless situation.
But in Quebec, nobody can make the case that we have nothing to lose if all turns out badly, because the province enjoys one of the highest standards of living in the world.

If you work at McDonalds or Tim Hortons, quitting your job is not much of a risk, but if you are a successful executive making a large six figure salary, quitting your job on the if-come, a decidedly risky and foolhardy affair.

Now who of we sovereigntists or federalists would buy a home sight unseen?
A thinking person would consider things like the location, the size, the layout, schools and transportation and above all THE PRICE.

I'm obviously not a sovereigntist, but if I was I'd certainly want to know what independence from Canada entailed before I committed to voting to split up.
 I, like you, have too much to lose if the decision turns out wrong, so I'd like as much information about the concept as I could obtain before taking the plunge.

This is where I take issue with sovereigntists and particularly those advocating for the project blindly without a clue as to what will be.

We haven't heard much from Pauline and the PQ, but what we have heard is frightening, a distinct lack of forethought and a manifest deficiency in planning.

How on Earth can anyone vote for the unknown and risk it all on the if-come. It boggles the mind.

The latest round of nonsense is Pauline's declaration that the new country of Quebec will use the Canadian dollar, this with or without the approval of Canada itself, permission to do so, not likely.
Now some sovereigntist leaders remain adamant that Canada can't stop it from using the Canadian dollar, but Canada can certainly make the process awfully uncomfortable, Canadian dollars not quite as bountiful and widespread as the U.S. dollar.
Worse, Pauline's  proclamation that Quebec would seek a seat at the Bank of Canada is also awfully presumptuous, an idea so foolish that it underscores the separatist leaders utter misapprehension of what Canadians think and who Canadians are.
It goes to her complete ignorance of the utter disdain Canadians would likely display towards Quebec post-Canada.
Tourism? Open borders? A European-like union? ......Is she smoking crack?

"No one can stop Quebec from using the Canadian dollar," former Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe says in defence of Pauline Marois' claim that an independent Quebec would retain the loonie and request a seat at the Bank of Canada.
"All of the economists will tell you that it is impossible to stop a country from using the Canadian dollar,"
Last week on the campaign trail, Marois was firm on these points:

1. Quebec would continue using Canadian currency
    
2. Request a seat at the Bank of Canada should a sovereignty referendum end in a "yes" vote
    
3. The border between Canada and Quebec should also remain open if Quebec secedes

Duceppe told Question Period that Marois' was right to make all three points. For example, if Canadians continue to be allowed to carry more than one passport, Duceppe said, the courtesy should extend to residents of an independent Quebec.  Link

I demand my Canadian passport, the Loonie and I want my MTV! GODAMMIT!

Quite the impassioned plea for conserving Canadian institutions from Quebec's most ardent separatist.

Sounds like dependence rather than independence. According to Duceppe, an independent Quebec will use Canadian money and its  citizens will travel under a Canadian passport. Perhaps Canada should keep equalization going and continue funding Radio-Canada and pay deadbeats in the Gaspé not to fish. Talk about incoherence!

Again the question is why all these connections to Canada?
Probably because these nonsensical ideas make sovereignty more appealing to the reluctant, nothing more than a strategy to fool Quebecers into voting for something they can never get.
Let us not forget Parizeau's assertion that he was going to fool Quebecers into sovereignty, like 'lobsters in a trap.'

The truth is that after sovereignty, Canadians will hate Quebecers at the worst, ignore them at best.
Interact with them as good neighbours? Not going to happen.
It's more likely that a virtual  if not physical Poutine Wall will be erected between Canada and Quebec, with travel back and forth for tourism a pipe dream conceived by an idiot.

By the way, that ferocious defence of Quebec's right to use the Canadian dollar flies in the face of logic and indeed the very policies that the PQ defended until recently.

Have we forgotten the debate over the 'Dutch Disease' question where Quebec separatists were claiming that the Canadian dollar was overvalued because of oil and therefore penalized the Quebec manufacturing industry?

"The phenomenon is called "Dutch disease" and works as follows: the more oil production is an important part of the domestic industry and exports more oil and gas push up the value of the currency.

High currency increases the price of other goods and services exported, making them less competitive abroad, resulting in job losses for non-oil sectors. In addition, the oil industry employment with high wages employees, which leads to higher wages in other industries, also making their products more expensive and therefore less competitive, hence more job losses. I cited a study by three economists saying that "up to 54% of manufacturing jobs lost in Canada between 2002 and 2007 were due to Dutch disease." Applied in Quebec, this ratio provides 55,000 jobs lost. Jean-François Lisée,

"The problem is that in 30 years, the oilsands could be much less important. And we will have done away with industries in Quebec, "worries Rodrigue Tremblay, professor emeritus of economics at the University of Montreal. Link

So in fact until last week, sovereigntists were saying that one of the prime goals of independence was to get rid of the over-valued Canadian dollar, a so-called hindrance to Quebec prosperity. 
Now they have utterly reversed themselves, embracing the Loonie as the currency of choice in an independent Quebec.
In the French press the word 'incoherence' is a favourite catchword, used to describe 'inconsistency' in policy, something that the sovereigntists and the PQ demonstrate a mastery of.
It is likely that a cold hard look at the potential value of a Quebec dollar, frightened the separatists to reconsider.
A report by François Barrière, vice-president of currencies at the Laurentien Bank of Canada predicted the Quebec dollar to be worth 73¢, right off the bat, something deemed unacceptable by separatist strategists  in the debate for hearts and minds.   Link{fr}

But how can the complete reversal of the position on currency go so unnoticed, unchallenged and un-debated? It smacks of amateurism.

So many of the positions on sovereignty just don't stand up to the most rudimentary of examinations, like the theory that Quebec would save money by getting rid of costly bilingualism, operating in just one language, French.
It's an easy sell to those eager to believe, until one examines the truth, which is that Quebec lives in English North America and would have to interact in English just the same.

Let us consider the price of a movie ticket which today is the same in Quebec City as is in Sudbury. Yet the Quebec version of the movie is dubbed into French, the cost borne by consumers across Canada, where in fact English Canadians pay for 77% of the cost of bilingualism.
This translation cost for Canadian and American products will be borne by Quebecers alone in an independent Quebec.
In fact, disconnecting 'national' pricing will have an adverse effect of Quebec consumer prices, including everything from software to Corn flakes to cars.
Today Canadian consumer prices are disconnected from those in the USA and we can see the adverse effect, with a car built in Windsor, Canada costing up to $5,000 more in Toronto than Hawaii.

This same effect will manifest itself as Quebec becomes its own distinct market. 
It doesn't auger well for consumers, where in stores like Costco, prices today are higher than in American locations, largely due to reduced expenses, south of the border. 
The same will apply to Quebec where prices will be higher than in Canada because of higher taxes and operating expenses. No longer will Canada level the consumer price playing field for Quebec by robbing Peter to pay Pierre.

Quebec sovereigntists have always used the  cherry picking option to show how Quebec is badly served by federalism, pointing to those certain programs where Quebec gets less of its fair share, while ignoring where it gets more and the balance of benefit, some $17 billion to the good.

In fact it doesn't fill one with confidence to know that the leader of the sovereignty movement doesn't even know how much equalization payments Quebec will get next year, mistaking the total federal transfer (an admission that she is aware of the transfer) of some $17 billion, instead of the $9 billion plus which is the equalization payment. 

Jean-François Lisée, another light bulb, tells us that the PQ is acting responsibly by running up the deficit to pay off the debt. It's scary.

Mention that Radio-Canada receives 40% of the CBC budget or that Quebec sucks out 40% of the unemployment fund and all that is offered in rebuttal is blank stares by separatist apologists who universally conclude that these asymmetrical payments are reasonable and fair.
Some idiot sovereigntists even maintain that the equalization payment Quebec receives is a plot to somehow keep Quebec down and beholding.

What will be in an independent Quebec is of vital importance and interest for those making the decision, the voters of Quebec.
Recently a panel of so-called sovereigntist experts came to the conclusion that Quebec would be just fine after sovereignty, all without ever considering the Canada 'effect' and the relocation of perhaps hundreds of thousand of taxpayers and businesses.

The truth is that nobody really knows what will happen and it is frightening that Quebecers are willing to risk everything on an unpredictable future.

It can go okay or it can go dreadfully wrong and a risk that I am shocked that so many people are willing to make on blind and idiot faith.

I don't want to sound the trumpet of gloom and doom, because if there is a plan that makes sense I'd like to hear it and I'm sure Quebecers should want to hear it as well.

But until then, voting YES is like buying a pig in a poke, not a good idea 400 years ago and not a particularly good idea now.

Sunday Housekeeping Volume 13

 During my trip down south I was without the use of my computer for a week and relied on my smartphone to monitor the blog and keep in touch.

It was, to say the least, a sobering experience and I can attest that the little keyboard is a devil that contributes to many typos. Let's not even mention that evil autocorrect function.

So I am politely asking everyone to layoff complaints about typos COMPLETELY. This blog is about ideas, not typing.
NO SPELLING NAZIS, no matter the urge


There is an exception to the spelling and typo rule.
That is mistakes in the main blog piece. I would appreciate a polite email, so that I can make corrections.

Now we've been getting a lot of links in the comments section and trust me, it is almost impossible to copy and paste long URLs on a small screen.

I would ask that at a minimum, contributors use a URL shortner that shrinks the URL down to a manageable size.

1. Copy the URL link you want to show
2. Go to  goo.gl or bitly.com
3. Paste the link and press 'shorten'
4. Copy and use the new shortened link.

Note: With Google you'll have to enter that cursed captcha, but only for the first time on each device.

Of course for bravehearts you can actually embed your link like a professional by adding this to your comment. It is code and will magically make your URL clickable. I promise.

<a href="http://reference site">site name here </a>

<a href="http://reference site">site name here </a>

Copy the above and replace the shaded blue between the " " with the URL you want to direct.
Do the same for the yellow-shaded are and replace it with some identifying text which will be the clickable link.

<a href="http://nodogsoranglophones.blogspot.ca/p/using-formatting-in-your-comments.html">How to Format comments </a>

It will come out in your comment like below and is clickable.

How to Format comments

Please help readers follow your links more easily by using one of the two above methods.
It doesn't take long and will assure you that many more readers follow your link.

I'd like to thank readers for pushing the counter up to a new record level, crossing the 90,000 barrier for the first time ever, this week.

I will be blogging as often as I can during this election campaign and hope to bring some insights that the regular PRESS cannot or will not make.

It will also be a platform for your comments so we hopefully don't have to wade through the 200+ button, which many readers actually don't know exists.

French versus English Volume 104

The Canadian Dollar in an independent Quebec

This article by Claude Castonguay appeared in French in La Presse. It is translated here by myself.
If you read French please do the author the courtesy of reading the original article HERE at LaPresse

Currency is an important symbol a people's identity. An independent Quebec should have its own currency, a Quebec dollar. With the prospect of a referendum, it is important to analyze the effects entailed with replacing the Canadian dollar by a Quebec dollar.

The Quebec dollar value and stability are the two main issues. The value of a currency is related to the strength of the economy, public finances and the debt of a country. But the value and stability of a currency depends on the level of trust that citizens, investors and speculators place in that currency.

Given these factors, a new Quebec dollar would inevitably have a lower value than the U.S. and Canadian dollars. Currently, the Canadian dollar is worth 90 cents against the U.S. dollar, analysts consider this difference as justified. Similarly, we can assume that the value of a new Quebec dollar would be about 85 cents against the Canadian dollar and 75 cents against the U.S. dollar.

During the changeover, Quebecers would have their savings and assets decline by around 15 %. Before such an eventuality, Quebecers would probably take all possible measures to prevent the devaluation of their savings and their assets. They would move away their assets outside of Quebec into U.S. dollars. This would add to the instability of the new currency and would lead to a further decline in its value.

In other words, should Quebec make a declaration of independence,  it would have no choice but to keep the Canadian dollar. This is what the Parti Québécois recognized  on the eve of the 1995 referendum . The use of the Canadian dollar would normally require the conclusion of a monetary union between the newly independent Quebec and Canada, divided by the departure of Quebec. The conclusion of such an agreement would be highly problematic.

We would see this in Britain if the Scots vote in September for their independence. The British Chancellor of the Exchequer warned them they could not  keep the pound, the British public would not accept it. It is clear that the Canadian Prime Minister would be in the same situation in the event of a vote for Quebec independence.

Quebec would thus have no choice but to continue to use the Canadian dollar , however, without the benefit of the protection of a monetary union. That is to say that monetary policy would be established by the Bank of Canada strictly according to the situation in the rest of Canada.

Twenty years ago, Argentina had embarked on this path. It allowed its citizens to exchange, according to a predetermined exchange rate  their pesos against the U.S. dollar . Argentines rushed to exchange their pesos for U.S. dollars and move it out of the country, which led to the fall in the value of the peso and a real crisis.

We conclude that in the event of Quebec independence, it would be necessary to negotiate in a hostile environment, an agreement to eventually return to the bosom of the Bank of Canada under conditions less favorable than those currently prevailing.

In the current electoral context, some issues may possibly be carried forward to an eventual White Paper on sovereignty. This is not the case for the currency issue. Voters are entitled to know, before exercising their voting intentions what the Parti Québécois' currency policy will be in an independent Quebec.

But apparently Pauline has other ideas.

"A sovereign Quebec would use the Canadian dollar and request a seat on the Bank of Canada’s decision-making body, Parti Québécois Leader Pauline Marois said Wednesday on the campaign trail.
The PQ Leader pointed to several studies on the matter conducted in the early 1990s which showed that there would be no obstacles for an independent Quebec to using the Canadian dollar. However, getting a seat on the Bank of Canada’s Governing Council would be more difficult.

“Obviously we may wish to get a seat at the Bank of Canada but we would accept the Canadian monetary policies,” Ms. Marois said.

Liberal Leader Philippe Couillard said Ms. Marois is living in a dream world.
“The PQ always tries to take us to an imaginary world, Alice in Wonderland, where everything is going to be so great. No borders, no passport, it’s fantastic. Everybody’s going to be great friends,” said Mr. Couillard. Link

So it seems that Pauline Marois has made a choice, that is to use the Canadian Dollar with or without Canada's permission, a permission that is very likely to be denied, even if it is a paying proposition for Canada.
Having Quebec maintain the use of the Canadian Dollar is worth about a billion dollars a year to Canada because of the outstanding float. Quebecers have about $10 billion in cash in their wallets and cash drawers, money that actually represents an interest free loan to Canada.
At any rate there is no reason to believe that Canadians would be in a mood to provide new dollar bills to Quebec as they fall into 'Canadian' hands. Such an assumption by Marois is utter bravado.
In the article above it is important to note that the Brits have already told the Scots that a free Scotland would not be allowed to use the English currency and perhaps it is appropriate for Ottawa politicians to burst Pauline's pipe dream as well!

In the meantime in Scotland: Currency union ‘unlikely’

Concerns over the future of an independent Scotland’s fiscal position, the size of its banking sector and its monetary regime have been highlighted in a report by a global banking group. The publication from Citi also looks at the possible currency and debt arrangements in the event of a yes vote, and considers the strength of Scotland’s credit rating.

It found that an independent Scotland’s fiscal position would be “relatively weak and risky” while a monetary union between Scotland and the rest of the UK is “unlikely”. The report has been compiled jointly by Citi’s economics, rate strategy and political analysis teams ahead of the September referendum.

Citi’s report says: “We regard a sterling monetary union as unlikely but we are genuinely unsure what currency and monetary policy would be adopted by an independent Scotland.“In our view, it is astonishing that the Scottish Government, in seeking independence, has reached this stage: seeking a currency union without agreement with the rest of the UK and without a clear alternative plan.”

It continued: “Overall, we believe an independent Scotland would have a relatively weak and risky fiscal position. This might well produce a sizeable borrowing premium.....

....“It’s absolutely clear independence would be a big problem for Scotland rather than the solution - and not having any sort of currency plan makes it an even bigger problem.” Link

According to Bloomberg, Separatist Revival is Raising Quebec Borrowing Costs

By Hugo Miller

Quebec’s borrowing costs are rising as independence once again becomes an election issue in Canada’s second largest and most indebted province.
Quebec Premier Pauline Marois called this week for an election on April 7 in a bid to turn her minority government into a majority, renewing speculation she will press for a referendum on splitting from Canada. The spread, or extra yield demanded by investors, on Quebec’s 10-year bond over debt from neighboring Ontario has widened 7 basis points to 17 basis points since the Quebec bond was issued in December, data compiled by Bloomberg shows. The spread has widened three basis points since the start of last week. Read more at Bloomberg

No International recognition for Crimean referendum

Quebec sovereigntist suffered a brutal lesson in realpolitik as the world has announced that it will not recognize a referendum on Crimean Independence.

"The Group of 7 world leaders say they won't recognize results of a referendum for the Crimea region to split from Ukraine and join Russia.

A statement from the seven nations released from the White House on Wednesday calls on Russia "to cease all efforts to change the status of Crimea contrary to Ukrainian law and in violation of international law." It says the referendum scheduled for this weekend "would have no legal effect" and the process is deeply flawed.

The leaders said they would take further action, individually and collectively, if Russia tries to annex Crimea.

The statement was from the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Britain and the United States, along with the European Council and the European Commission." ABC News

As always, recognition is based on politics and not international law as sovereigntists maintain. Unless Canada recognizes a new state of Quebec, nobody else but a handful will either.

 

More PQ election nonsense

Lisée offers a lesson in PQ Economics 101

Here's a quote from Jean-François Lisée that caught my attention for its utter and complete stupidity.
He said it in English to a CTV news reporter and it aired on the six o'clock news last Tuesday.

"We're putting a billion and a half towards the debt.
We could have decided to have a lower deficit by not putting a billion and a half on the debt. But it was a billion and a half last year and a billion and a half this year and a billion and a half next year.

What kind of sheer nonsense is that?
So let's understand this, the PQ is paying off the debt with money it doesn't have.
In the PQ world of make-believe finances, it is increasing the deficit to lower the debt! Fabulous!

How clever! Perhaps Quebec can also resort to some creative cheque kiting as well.

Here's another idea that Jean-François Lisée can float in order to make an independent Quebec some money.;

"an undoctored stolen passport – increasingly used by the gangs, who are now dealing in such high volumes that they can afford simply to wait until a potential client shows up of approximately the right age and appearance – typically sells for between $1,500 and $3,000, depending on its condition, nationality, and the number of years it has left to run. Italian, British, Spanish and other European passports fetch about $1,000, Tinawut said, while Israeli passports cost $1,500-$2,000 and Canadian can go for up to $3,000. Link

In the light of a Quebec referendum win, the new Quebec government could collect the now worthless passports and sell them on the Black market for a tidy sum!

  ELECTION JOKE: The Liberals accuse the PQ of trying to divide Quebecers with the Charter of Values​​, so why do the Liberals also hope for the return of the Nordiques, whose rivalry with the Canadiens still divides Quebec after 20 years of absence. Where is the consistency?- Mathieu Charlebois

Idiot PQ minister lies about having Twitter account hacked

After sending out a rather innocuous tweet, Quebec Family Minister, Nicole Léger made the mistake of not sending the next Tweet privately as well and sent out a crude message about being obliged to tweet. It was obviously  meant to be  private communication

Realizing her mistake, she took down the offending tweet quickly, but not before some grabbed a screen shot.

She then tweeted that (gasp!)  her account had been momentarily hijacked, but that all had returned to normal.

HA!!!!! What a load of bullshit, that fooled nobody!!!

The last tweeter warned that if Madame Léger was ever in a car accident, it would be the car's fault. Link{fr}

Quebec Language police decamp on salad store

"A Montreal salad bar, Mandy’s, is under fire from Quebec’s language police because its decor features vintage English signs. The Office québécois de la langue française told sisters Mandy and Rebecca Wolfe they would have to remove the purely decorative signs from their shop in traditionally anglophone Westmount (they have a second location in the predominately francophone Plateau). Rebecca Wolfe, who doesn’t plan to remove the signs, spoke to the National Post‘s Hillary Robert on Wednesday:" Link

Journal de Montreal FAIL!

Fun with Election Signs 

 

Probably the best campaign poster defacement  EVER!!!

 

Wanna see more? CLICK HERE   and  HERE

Here are some not so funny vandalisations;

 

Say what you want, I've always maintained that Quebecers, English, French or Ethnic, have the sharpest sense of humour in Canada and where sarcasm reigns supreme!!!
Quebec humour crosses all language and political lines, where  fun of smug big shots is a national pastime!

Whispering politicians

We all know politicians and news anchors use tele-prompters to read prepared text, but the Parti Quebecois gave a throwback view to the old days of theatre where an actual person would hide in a crawl space at the foot of the stage, hidden from fans, feeding words to actors who had forgotten their lines.

Watch this video of Pauline Marois feeding lines to a candidate and then in turn having line fed to her by the finance minister Nicholas Marceau.
You don't need to understand French to see whats going on. The fun starts at 30 seconds;

Journal de Montreal comments of the week

Okay, time to lighten up for the weekend and have only pleasant thoughts 

 

Seen in Toronto 

 

 

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu accidentally adds Hitler mustache to German Chancellor Angela Merkel

A daycare advertises  it services to potential parents in a grocery store. $25 a day with a receipt. $20 without.  Green Post-it is not amused.

PQ's Daniel Breton catches 40 winks during colleagues boring speech

Here's a great reaction;

Another great Ontario/Quebec border humiliation!

Canada watches Olympic Hockey

 

Feeling Depressed...This will make you feel better, I promise.

CLICK IF YOU WANT TO FEEL HAPPY

HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!

BONNE FIN DE SEMAINE!