English School Boards Defend Promoting Quebec Nationalism

Making a collective gaffe is something that no organization is immune from, but when it happens, it's generally a shock to the upper management. Sometimes defending the indefensible seems like a better option than admitting the mistake quite publicly and working towards repairing the damage. 

Every single organization is vulnerable to the big gaffe, it's bound to happen even with the best intentions. But how an organization deals with adversity, is what separates the good from the bad and today, our Quebec English school boards are demonstrating,  how very, very, bad they are.

You might  remember the disastrous launch of "New Coke" back in 1985, when the company replaced the old familiar taste of Americas favourite drink with a newer and  supposedly 'younger' edition.  As marketing strategies go, it couldn't have been a bigger fiasco. The public was so outraged that the company fiddled with a familiar friend that the pressure to return to the old product was unbearable.

The company had staked its future on the new product  and had invested heavily. Initially trying to  ride out the storm, the company finally realized that they'd have to do the unthinkable. Abandon ship.

On July 11, Coca-Cola withdrew New Coke from stores. “We did not understand the deep emotions of so many of our customers for Coca-Cola,” said company President Donald R. Keough.

A Montreal Gazette editorial on June 12, revealed that Grade ten students in English school boards were subjected to exam questions that would make the hair crawl on any bone fide Anglo Quebecker.

Of the four questions to be answered, the first question required the student to write a paragraph and to "make an observation about some vision as Quebec as a nation."
 The second asks the student to "formulate three questions about some vision of Quebec as a nation."
The third question has a diagram that is to be completed by listing four examples of;
a) "What makes Quebec distinct?" and
b) "How can Quebec protect its distinct status?"
The exam's final issue is "Justify your opinion on protecting Quebec's distinct society," and requires the student to produce a two-page essay on: "Will the recognition of Quebec as a nation help protect Quebec's distinct society?"

Yikes!!!!!
If you are assuming that these questions were rammed down the throat of school boards by the government, you'd be wrong.
The questions were formulated by the English school boards themselves, if you can believe it.
There was a shit storm of controversy on the English language radio talk shows with parents and students themselves howling at the inappropriateness of the question.

On June 16th in a letter to the Montreal Gazette, a parent wondered;

"Will students fail the exam because they have the intelligence to answer the question logically? Will all English students who failed the exam be forced to attend summer school because they did not answer the questions according to the doctrine of the Quebec government? LINK

How did the school boards react? By circling the wagons and defending the indefensible. Yup, they are trying to ride out the controversy, instead of admitting the blunder.

One official offered that the questions were based on the Prime Minster's recognition that Quebec is a distinct society.

An angry caller pointed out that the Prime Minister did nothing of the sort. He reminded listeners that the Prime Minister recognized Quebeckers as a distinct society, not the Province of Quebec.

Much fury on the radio hot lines ensued.

One mother was torn between telling her son to suck it up and just give the politically correct answer that will get him into  Cegep,  or to defy the authority by rejecting the very premises of the questions.
Tough call.
The school  boards aren't making it easy by stupidly defending their indefensible position. It's no wonder our English school boards have a reputation for dysfunction.

Perhaps it's time for board members to to be reminded of the story of  New Coke..

Marc Bellemare Starting to look Unbalanced

A few days ago Marc Bellemare gave an interview on a French language all-news station telling all who would listen that he has no intention of testifying before the Bastarache Commission, looking into his express allegations that Premier Charest and the Liberal party exercised undo influence on the selection of judges while he was justice minister. Mr. Bellemare also stated that he would fight any subpoena, based on his opinion that the Commission is biased, a position that legal experts agree is un-winnable.

I've spoken to Liberal insiders, at the very highest levels who have told me that in no uncertain terms that Bellemare is off his rocker.
His allegations stunned the party and the Premier in particular who swears that the two left on good terms. That's their story.

But what prompted his outburst years later remains a mystery. Nobody, and Bellemare in particular has explained it.

When Bellemare first made his allegations the press embraced the story with open arms, after all, it was good press and fit in nicely with the ongoing controversy over ethics in the Premier's office.

But after the initial hoopla, certain members of the press did  what they do best, investigate the veracity of what was being presented as fact.

Jeam Lapierre, one of Quebec's finest political analysts (he was a member of Paul Martins's cabinet, before quitting) was visibly perturbed with Bellemare's lack of forthrightness. He offered an on-air opinion that it was high time for the ex-justice minister to 'put up or shut up.'

Lapierre also took exception to the blistering attack that Bellemare made on Justice Michel Bastarache who is heading the commission. 

"I don't have confidence that Mr. Bastarache has the impartiality or the intellectual and moral liberty to go so far as to say that Mr. Charest lied, and if he doesn't have that capacity, in my opinion he is not impartial,"
"If commissioner Bastarache says that Jean Charest lied, that means what? It means the end of the government, the end of Jean Charest's career. Do you think Mr. Bastarache has that intellectual liberty?" - Marc Bellemare

Bellemare then cast more aspirations on the commission head by pointing out that he is a member of a law firm closely linked to the government.

Not even the Parti Quebecois would dare go so far as to call an ex-Supreme Court Justice unfit and it is looking more and more that Bellemare is getting cold feet.

Given the aggressiveness that Premier Charest is going after Bellemare, it seems that the Premier is absolutely convinced that Bellemare is either lying or unable to prove his allegations.

Mr. Bellemare is starting to look familiarly like Myriam Bédard, the ex-Olympian that rocked the political world with her allegations that she was fired from her VIA Rail job because she raised objections concerning the corporation's dealings with a firm involved in the Sponsorship scandal. She became quite a personality and testified before Parliament making all sorts of allegations. The reaction from the brass at VIA rail was to depict her in various unflattering terms, an unwise decision which led to the sacking of then President of the crown corporation, Jean Pelletier.

But months later it became quite evident that Ms. Bédard had several screws loose, as she continued to make statements that were bizarre, to say the least.

"...she claimed that she had been told that Groupaction was involved in drug trafficking, that her partner Nima Mazhari had personally convinced Prime Minister Chrétien to keep Canada out of the war in Iraq, and that Québécois race car legend Jacques Villeneuve had been paid $12 million to wear a Canadian flag on his uniform." Wikipedia

In 2007, she was found  guilty of child abduction (for violation of a child custody agreement) when she took her child  to Washington DC, without permission, where she was arrested by U.S Marshalls.
 
Her common law husband Nima Mazhari was also convicted in 2007 of fraud. A Quebec City judge described him as a "liar" and a "manipulator," and sent him to jail for six months for bilking an elderly artist out of $100,000 in paintings.

Jean Pelletier later sued the government for wrongful dismissal in relation to his firing in the Bédard affair and won a $400,000 settlement.

We may just be witnessing another saga of similar proportions.

Who knows?
But a lot of people are starting to wonder about the sanity of Marc Bellemare.

World Cup Soccer---Bah Humbug!

Having just witnessed another fantastic NHL hockey playoff come to an end, and now watching the hoopla surrounding the World Cup of Soccer in South Africa, I cannot escape the feeling that, well quite simply, soccer is one boring experience!

Much as I've tried over the years to get into the game of soccer, I just can't. The sad truth is that as a spectator sport, soccer plainly sucks.

Now before you get off on a rant and tell me that it's the most popular sport in the world, let me say that, in and of itself, that fact is wholly unimpressive.

Rice is the most popular food in the world, but I wouldn't sing its praises either.

Soccer is the most popular sport in the world simply because it appeals to the poor. That is why over one quarter of a billion people participate.

One ball and an open space is all it takes. As for rules, any idiot can catch on quickly, kick the ball into the net and score a point, most points wins.  For most nations, soccer is the only recreational sport that the country can afford to support and so soccer balls are provided for recreation in refugee camps, slums, poor villages and neighbourhoods across the entire world. In fact if you're in Liberia, you can even kick around a human skull, failing a ball. It makes perfect sense that soccer has a world-wide appeal, but it doesn't make it a great game.

Soccer suffers from some very basic and fundamental flaws. First and foremost is its LACK OF SCORING. Last Friday's opening World Cup matches yielded a grand total of two goals between the two games - not very exciting.

Not only is the lack of scoring a problem, but the LACK OF SCORING OPPORTUNITIES make the game almost impossible to sit through. It's a rare game that has more than six or seven scoring chances that get fans out of their seats, compared to a hockey where an average of between thirty and forty shots are directed at the net, each game. The reality of all this is that fans have to get rip-roaring drunk to sit through the tedium of a soccer match.  And so many drunken mobs of SOCCER HOOLIGANS roam the streets before and after matches with the stated goal of causing mayhem and destruction. Anything to make the soccer experience more exciting.

Soccer invented the the term 'NIL' to replace the word 'zero' to somehow denote that not scoring a goal is some sort of an achievement. An English fan once explained to me that soccer is a game of anticipation, not action. Arghhh....

Of course soccer has not come to grips with the fact that TIED GAMES (DRAWS) ARE A COLOSSAL BORE. Every other major sport in the world has figured out a tie-breaking formula and while soccer does use the 'Golden Goal" formula sometimes, the preliminary rounds have already provided the dreaded 'Kissing your sister' result all too often.


THE FIELD IS WAY TOO BIG, it takes so long to get to the opposing goal that almost all the time is wasted in the neutral field. For fans in the stands, it's a snooze-a-thon, players look like Lilliputians  and even when an exciting play is executed, hardly anyone notices.

The large field leads to inept refereeing, the officials are almost always too far away to get the call right, leading to comically bad decisions that affect the outcome of the match all too often.

In fact referees are so far away from the action that players have perfected the sickening art of diving, or faking, to the point that the very integrity of the game is in jeopardy.

Take a look at this video of soccer's finest, doing their thing.

Sickening!

How can any parent encourage their children to grow up and emulate a bunch of dishonest pansies, who flop around the field like beached whales, trying to cheat without any scruples or embarrassment.

When referees occasionally do catch someone diving, the player is given the ubiquitous yellow flag, or a warning, instead of being kicked off the field immediately. So diving pays.

Of course soccer refuses to use video replays to aid in making crucial decisions as compared to NHL hockey and American and Canadian football. The use of video review in sport has made the games infinitely fairer and yes, even more exciting.

Had any sort of video review been used, France would have had the most famous 'hand goal' reversed in its preliminary game with Ireland.

 The reputation of professional  soccer is set to take a stunning hit as allegations of widespread game-fixing are surfacing. Perhaps soccer with it's less than genius fan base can survive this type of scandal, but I can imagine the reaction in North America of the news that players of a professional team threw a game deliberately.
Even the slightest whiff of impropriety brings down the wrath of the league on any miscreant, just ask Pete Rose.

Investigative journalist Declan Hill, who authored The Fix: Soccer and Organized Crime, says match-fixing in professional soccer is organized primarily through the multi-billion-dollar illegal Asian gambling market and is widespread. Ecchhh!.  Link

Aside from all this, it boils down to the fact that soccer remains uninteresting to those not born into the game. Although easy enough to understand, soccer has little appeal to native born North Americans, who shun the game despite the best efforts of promoters to hawk the game.

North America's most important professional soccer league draws an average of just 16,000 per game and is heavily dependent on foreign immigrants as a fan base.

The world cup or "Mundial' is a time for North American immigrants to flaunt their national pride by flying flags on their cars and cheering for the home team in ethnic bars and restaurants. If you live in Toronto and Montreal or any city with a sizable immigrant population, you're now being treated to wildly enthusiastic display of support and adoration for the old country.

To all of you, I say, Enjoy!

Native Canadians will be sipping beer by the pool or cottage,  contemplating the upcoming NHL free agent bonanza on July 1st and the NHL draft.

As for the world Cup of Soccer. zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

She's Baaaaackkk...... and She's Out to Change your Religion

There's little doubt that Louise Beaudoin is the poster doll of French language militants who believe in the philosophy that the citizens exist to serve the state and that individual rights are subservient to perceived societal objectives.

 Thirty-five years ago, she along with Camille Laurin, the father of Bill 101 were the two personalities that became notorious not only for their militancy, but for the absolute delight that they hardly masked in taking down the English community a peg.

Perhaps Terry Mosher (drawing under the pen named "AISLIN") the famed Montreal Gazette political cartoonist summed up the collective feeling of the English community's opinion of her in depicting the bogey-woman Beaudoin in a Nazi-like dominatrix outfit, ready to crack the whip on unrepentant Anglos. Incidentally, this caricature is considered one of the finest ever produced by a Canadian political cartoonist.

There is no political radical, religious fanatic or cultist, so dangerous as those who believe in their divine right to dictate their view on a captive community. Smug, arrogant and superior, these Quebec ideologues consider the great unwashed unworthy of making their own decisions and believe that there is a certain noble calling in forcing people to do the 'right thing.'

Now Madame Beaudoin is back, preaching more limits on personal freedom. The latest assault is the so-called 'Charter of Secularism', a project that would remove religion from public life and render the government officially neutral when it comes to all matters pertaining to the divine.

"We need to draw a line in the sand, that will separate politics and religion in order to have a totally secular Quebec" Louise Beaudoin

 Madame Beaudoin and friends are using the debate over Bill 94 (outlawing the veil in various degrees) to push the Province towards a radical extreme, removing all religion from Quebec society.

Madame Beaudoin has been vocal in warning that she intends on pursuing an agenda that is much more serious than just banning the burqa. For that reason the Premier has back pedalled furiously and delayed hearings into the matter until the Fall. The hearings are fast looking to become a xenophobic repeat of the Bouchard/Taylor commission.

Beaudoin makes no bones about the fact that she is preparing a comprehensive and all-out assault on religion with the goal to removing all vestiges of religion from public life.

On the immediate agenda;

• the de-subsidization of private religious schools.
• the de-subsidization of religious day-care.
• the banning of any religious clothing or jewelry in any public institution, including schools, hospitals government offices and the courts by both employees and users.
• the banning of any type of religious accommodation at all.
• the total removal of religious affiliation in public institutions (think-Jewish General Hospital and its Kosher food)
• The banning of Kosher or Halal designations on widely distributed food. (Only specialty stores would be allowed to sell these items.

Later on

• Banning private religious schools.
• Banning private religious day-cares.
• Banning religious garb in public
• Banning private Sunday school classes
• Removing tax status of religious organizations
• Banning all religious clothing and medallions in public.

Too much? Already we are hearing from within the ranks of radical atheists that teaching children religion is akin to indoctrination and child abuse. Some groups are calling for religious institutions to be held accountable for the unequal treatment women are subjected to by the various organized religions.
If you read French, here is one example of a bitter attack on organized religion. LINK

Louise Beaudoin is a radical secularist, as well as a radical separatist. She is showing her teeth again like the nasty old pit bull that she is.

The evil bitch is back ...... and she wants your God.

Lack of Representation Nothing New for Anglo Quebeckers

In light of recent events surrounding Bill 103, (the Quebec Liberal party's reaction to the rejection by the Supreme court of Bill 104, a law enacted by the separatist Parti Quebecois back in 2002 to ostensibly close a loophole where ineligible students could gain entry into English schools,) a lot of readers have fulminated (well a few, anyway) in the comment section over the sad fact that Anglophone Quebeckers, have virtually no influence in the Liberal  party and that perhaps its time to give rebirth to an Anglo rights party again similar to the Equality Party of way back when.
The handful of Liberal MNAs who are English or Ethnic and who represent predominantly Anglo ridings appear to be co-opted to parrot the anti-English line that the Liberals, as well as all the other parties in the National Assembly adhere to. It's particularly galling to see them forced to bite their tongues on language issues like Bill 103 in order to keep their jobs.

Before I discuss the idea of a English rights party, lets review our Anglo and Ethnic talent in the National Assembly.
At first glance, it appears that Quebec is the only place in North America where not only bees, but WASPS are also endangered species, at least in Quebec's National Assembly.

By my count there is only one male and one female that can qualify as White, Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant, a situation that vastly under represents the 400,0000 Quebec citizens that can be classified as such.

Dividing Quebec's population by the 125 Parliamentary seats available yields approximately 70,000 people per constituency, notwithstanding that  urban ridings contain more voters than suburban ones (this is how the PQ gets disproportionately more seats  than votes.)
These numbers would indicate that in a perfect world Anglos would hold about 12 seats and Ethnics the same.

When it comes to overall representation it's clear that Anglos and ethnics are underrepresented across the board. With twenty percent of the population one would hope that Anglos and Ethnics would hold about 25 Parliamentary seats. Here's a rundown of the twelve that they do occupy. As it stands, Anglos hold just two seats and Ethnics ten. It can be argued that there is some crossover, but the basic facts remain.

It appears that when the Liberals designate someone to run in a safe English riding, the candidate is chosen using a formula whereby two birds can be killed with one stone. These 'safe' Anglo ridings are vehicles whereby ethnics who can double as Anglos are chosen.
 
An important element to Anglo/Ethnics Liberal representation in Parliament is the distinct lack of 'weight' that they bring. Only Sam Hadad can be said to exercise any real influence. The two Anglos rookies who were inserted into cabinet were unfortunately, mere tokens (and I hate to use the term) and represent nothing more than Jean Charest proxies, chosen for their docility and willingness to obey their master. Behind the scene, it's Jean Charest runs the Justice and Immigration departments using Yolande James and Kathleen Weil like a Charlie McCarthy marionette. As for Laurence Bergman, the designated Jew of the Assembly, it seems that with all that talent in Hebrew community, the Liberal opted for the nebbish. Perhaps Russel Copeman, one of the few competent Liberal Anglo politicians of late, read the writing on the wall and left politics.

It's painfully clear that when it comes to  representing Anglos, no party is really interested and protecting Anglo rights is actually perceived as a drawback by all.

Even the conservative ADQ is publicly against any accommodation that would allow English schools any device that would allow them to pinch non-eligible students.

Tym Machine in his blog reminds us that Mario Dumont favours a mixed health care system, one where a private option augments the public health system.
Yet Dumont expresses outrage at the idea that several hundred families can 'buy' their children an English education.
Apparently it's fine to jump the queue and purchase a hip replacement operation, but buying an English education is an affront to every Quebecker.

So it isn't surprising that none of our political parties are at all interested in protecting or boosting access to English schools. It's just bad politics, so many frustrated Anglos are suggesting a return to the days of the Equality Party, where Anglos forgoe voting the traditional Liberal way and elect English rights activists.

I remember the last time this happened, back in 1989 when the Equality Party manged to get almost 5% of the Provincial vote and elected four members to the National Assembly. At that time Anglos were furious over the provisions of Bill 101. I guess nothing has changed....

But the sad reality was that the party was marginally competent, sadly dysfunctional and grossly ineffective.
I've known Robert Libman (the leader of the party) professionally and as a friend for many years and have nothing but the highest respect for his abilities, competence and honesty. That being said, the other members of the party could only be described as accidental politicians.
The late Gordon Atkinson was also a great friend of mine and a mentor and teacher. He was honourable and  as refined  a gentleman as you could find. As soldier by training, he viewed issues in black and white and as you can guess was ill-suited to politics. He never fit in at the National Assembly and quickly lost interest in the whole political thing.

Neil Cameron was a well meaning academic, but was also not prepared for life in the political fast lane. He also turned out to be a disappointing bust, his background made him wholly unsuitable for the rough and tumble world of politics.
As for the last member of the quartet, Richard Holden was the joker in the deck. Clearly unbalanced when elected, he was soon kicked out of the party and spited his former colleagues by crossing the floor and sitting as a member of the Parti Quebecois, something that sent his Westmount constituents into a state of apoplexy. After his defeat in the next election, he was rewarded with a patronage job by his separatist masters but remained seriously unbalanced and committed suicide by jumping out of his Atwater condo.

After the Equality party imploded, it was a signal to the Anglo community that the 'independent' experiment was a bust.
Like the Bloc Quebecois of today, the influence of the Equality party was negligible and in fact made it easier for mainstream Quebeckers to ignore the constituency.

Sometimes there are no good options and sadly Anglos face the sad truth that they will never be adequately represented, no matter which route they pick.

For those wishing for an independent Anglo representation, it will never happen again and perhaps the only role of our Anglo and Ethnic members of the Liberal caucus is to remain, their presence a reminder that we persevere.

Sad....I know.....