Doctor Calls for Charter Protest

Here is a reproduction of a letter that is circulating around Montreal's medical community.
It was written Doctor Michael Shevall, Chair of the Pediatrics Department at the McGill Faculty of Medicine and Pediatrician-in-Chief at the Montreal Children’s Hospital and the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC).
Editors note: I have changed two names in the letter to pseudonyms, for obvious reasons.

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter ”
- Martin Luther King Jr.
Hi Everyone

The astute reader will already note from the absence of a Sir William Osler quote that there is something different about this week's Acknowledgment. The individuals selected this week are symbols, simply chosen for who they are though they abundantly merit an Acknowledgement for their substantial contributions.

First I must make it clear that I am writing not in my position as Chair of the Department or Physician-in-Chief of our beloved hospital. I have not sought my employers' endorsement for this. I am writing as an individual and colleague who simply cannot remain silent this week about the outrage that is the proposed provincial Charter of Values. Leadership comes with responsibility. It also comes with opportunity and in this case a readily available email distribution list. If you object to my using this as a means of delivering a "political" message, simply read no further. If I get flak from the powers to be in the University or the MUHC, its flak I am more than willing to take for the sake of a clear conscience and being able to look my children in their eyes if they ever ask; "Dad, what did you do?"

The proposed Charter is so fundamentally flawed, it astounds me that in 2013 in the democratic civil society that we purport to be that it even merits consideration or debate. It shows a fundamental failure of logic, reason and historical precedent.

The state is indeed separate from religion. The state should be neutral in matters of religion and faith. The state should not use it resources to favour one religion over another.

How these fundamental truths of our society can be construed to mean that an individual's rights of religious expression must be constrained in some way is incomprehensible.

Personalizing an issue allows us to move from the abstract to the particular. When this Charter was introduced I immediately thought of two members of our community that I interact with a regular basis. I thought of Brian Rosen (not his real name,) a classmate, colleague and friend, who as an observant Jew regularly wears the now forbidden kippah. For over 20 years Brian has provided care for Quebec's children with frequently challenging immunologic and allergic disorders. He is a world-leading researcher in his field. Brian is a full Professor and Associate Chair (Research) for the Department. Any clinical Department is robust and successful with Faculty members such as Brian. I thought of my pediatric neurology resident Rima Allkouri. (not her real name) Rima immigrated to Quebec as a teenager from her native Ghana. Fluent in French, in addition to English and Arabic, Rima completed a MD-PhD at McGill and is now in her final year of her residency. She is everything you would want a resident to be; intelligent, hard working, conscientious, and a determined advocate for her patients. She has a long bright future ahead of her. Rima wears a hijab. After 5 years of knowing her, I have no clue what her hair color is.

For both Brian and Rima, their faith and spirituality is as much a part of their individual identity as anyone's skin color, mother tongue, ethnic origin, gender identity or sexual orientation. It is an essential integral part of who they are. It makes them the individuals we value. It has absolutely no impact on others. It does not influence the care they provide. No child or family has complained. Yet these outward expressions of their deeply held faith now somehow violates a Charter of Values (an example of naming irony if there ever was one) that somehow must be banned from the public service sphere in which they serve so valuable a role. That these expressions of faith are banned, but not others, affirms the inherently racist and discriminatory nature of a Charter that springs from the darkest reaches of ignorance.

Any student of history will tell you that the erosion of human rights for some is always predicated on the notion that the "other" is somehow less of a person, less of a human. The last 100 years is all too replete with such examples, unfortunately not restricted by geography, ideology or ethnic distinctions. Take a moment to personally think of a few. Don’t forget to think of the victims who under different circumstances of time and location might have been you or someone you know and care about.

Our Department's Mission/Vision/Values statement eloquently describes our commitments to cultural sensitivity, tolerance and collegiality. Our staff and most importantly the children and families we care for reflect the diversity of humanity. You don’t need to travel to tour the world. It is here amongst us. There is no going back as much as some would like.

We cannot remain silent on this. To hide behind an institutional "opt-out" cause is to accept for others what we would not accept for ourselves. It is quite frankly cowardly.

There is a wonderful story of Christian X, King of Denmark during the Nazi occupation, wearing a yellow Star of David identifying with his Jewish subjects when they were compelled to do so by the Nazi occupiers. Unfortunately historically it is not true, but it gives me an idea for an action we can take collectively.

What I am suggesting is that one pre-selected work day in the very near future that we all choose to wear one of the banned symbols, be it a kippah or turban for men, a hijab for women, or large crosses for both genders. In this way we can affirm our identification with those whose rights are directly infringed by this Charter. By the way while some are directly infringed, denying rights to some is ultimately a denial of rights to all.

Please contact myself if you are interested in helping to organize the above protest. I already have my kippah picked out and would love to have some company.

Regards


Michael Shevell, MD CM, FRCPC, FAAN, FANA

In August, as leaks appeared in the newspapers concerning the proposed Charter a quick poll indicated that the majority of Quebecers where in favour.

Since the publication of the details, there has been a dramatic decrease in support, a happy reaction to the push back by citizens who after taking stock of what was to be enacted, thought better of the idea of supporting the draft legislation.

In August 57% of Quebecers supported the idea of a Charter, while 28% opposed.
The latest poll has 43% in favour and 42% against.

I have heard from more than a few Quebec commentators that Quebecers are uncomfortable having this argument and so putting on more pressure will help sink or gut this law.
The undecideds are holding firm at about 15-16%, but if the 'argument' continues, more will shift to the 'against' side.

I think that a lovely gesture like donning the hijab, turban or kippah by health professional for a day of support will rock the province.
The more institutions that join the protest, even for a day, the stronger the message.

I daresay the event would not only be reported here but around the world.

It is also important to keep up the pressure for another reason, that is, to weaken this issue over which the PQ is hoping to boost its popularity and perhaps on to a majority government.
That seems to have failed, but with more push back, the population will become tired and annoyed with the issue.

Health professionals who wear articles of faith are keeping their heads down, hoping that the issue will go away (it probably will as I predicted.)
But it is the wrong approach.
Those doctors, nurses, technicians and ancillary staff who speak out publicly and aver that they will seek employment outside Quebec will send a powerful shot across the bow of Charter supporters.
There is a hungry and willing press, ready to pass on your message, so don't be afraid.

It is time to ramp up the pressure, because in killing the Charter of Secularism, we are hammering in the last nail in the coffin of Pauline Marois' government.

Congratulations to Doctor Sheval for his initiative, I hope it is successful and that many take up the call.

If any person of faith would like to avail themselves of this space to articulate his or her position as to why wearing a religious symbol is important to them, please contact me at: anglomontreal@gmail.com.
I can even offer  to print your contribution without attribution.

Charter of Secularism...Death Rattle of the Sovereignty Movement

In politics as in life, you never really know how events will play out, but when you embark on a foolish or ill-thought out course of action, it shouldn't be surprising when things blow up in your face.

This week, I watched a news story about a young Quebec couple who sold off everything, quit their jobs in order to set sail with their two young children on a year-long adventure, sailing the Caribbean. Asked by the interviewer if they had enough sailing experience to embark on such an adventure, the couple admitted that they didn't, but they were going to wing it just the same.

How do you think that's going to work out?

As I watched the story, I could not help but worry for the children, victims of idiot and reckless parents.

Such is the Charter of Secularism, a singularly stupid idea brought forward by an idiot and reckless government, with the very real potential of harming individual citizens and wreaking what social harmony we now enjoy.

So it isn't surprising that the wheels are falling off the bus of this latest and most desperate gambit of the sovereignty movement, the so-called Charter of Secularism.

While the rubes in Herouxville applaud the government's attempt to turn Quebec immigrants into poutine/maple syrup/bacon lovers who enjoy the music of Marie-Mai and the humor of Mike Ward, all I can say is...

T'aint gonna happen....

It remains a simple undeniable fact that if you allow for Muslim, Jewish, Sikh or Buddhist immigration, you are going to end up with Muslim, Jewish, Sikh and Buddhist citizens and forcing them to dress up as Santa Claus just won't change that fact.
This is the fantasy of the Charter of Secularism, where the old dictum of getting what you pay for is  suspended in favour of an altered perception of reality, where one hopes that the pizza ordered from Dominos, will actually taste like poutine.

At the onset, the Charter had enough popular support to make it's chances of being passed into law, while not a slam dunk, highly likely.
But of course, the devil is in the details and it hasn't taken long for reality to catch up with fantasy, the cold hard truth a sad reminder that you shouldn't go off sailing with no plan, no experience or technical know-how.

Last week we learned that the Charter of Secularism hasn't a snowball's chance in Hell of passing the most rudimentary constitutional challenge.
Clever La Presse reporter Yves Boisvert, realized that Quebec Justice Minister Bertrand St-Arnaud's strange silence meant that something was rotten in Denmark,
A little digging by the reporter turned up the fact that the PQ government was advised by its own legal department that the proposed law was undeniably unconstitutional.
And so the government sought a favorable opinion, from an outside jurist.
The best they could come up with was an opinion by Henri Brun, a constitutional lawyer who told the government that the case was pleadable, but not much else. He also told them that the chances of success would increase if the law pertained only to government employees in positions of power (police, judges, guards, etc.)

And so the government is proceeding, knowing full well it will lose in court, exactly the path chosen by Camille Laurin who included clause after clause of nonsense in the original Bill 101, full well in the knowledge that the Supreme Court would invalidate the unconstitutional parts, in a cynical, but not unsuccessful manoeuvre to enrage Quebecers against Canada.

But things are unraveling quickly, yesterday a reader (Vincent Beaudry) pointed out a story of intolerance in Quebec city where a Muslim woman was actually physically assaulted in a shopping mall, because of her veil, a perfectly predictable reaction to the targeting of non-Christians of faith. Link{fr}
I warned you that this would happen a while back, it wasn't exactly a bold prediction, the logical extension of a policy of the demonification of Muslims. What is most difficult to accept is that the PQ also understood that these types of reactions were inevitable, but proceeded anyway, willing to roll the dice in a sad attempt to breathe life into the moribund sovereignty movement.

We are now living the theatre of the absurd as highlighted by another story, one that hasn't really made the rounds because it was hidden behind a pay wall in Le Journal de Quebec. Link{fr}
As farcical as Alice in Wonderland or as stupid as the promotion of the non-religious nature of the Crucifix in the National Assembly is the story of a Christian chapel, located directly within a government building  and this for the last twenty years. It seems that public employees of faith can celebrate Mass twice a week without leaving the comfort of the building housing their government office. The chapel is provided by the government rent-free and a Catholic priest ministers to the faithful.
So when all this was revealed one would expect the government to quickly declare that in the new secular Quebec, it would no longer be acceptable to tolerate the chapel.
If you thought that, you would be wrong.
In a illogical leap of faith, the assistant to Bernard Drainville said that the issue is complex and needed to be studied further, as the chapel could be considered a reasonable accommodation and that non-Christians had equal access to the facility.
I kid you not.
I am not even going to get into arguing why this is wrong, I have too much respect for readers who can no doubt draw their own conclusion.
Now readers, do not for a moment conclude that I am advocating that the chapel be removed, I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the utterly incoherent PQ position.

Last Thursday, the head of the Bloc Quebecois kicked out Bloc MP Maria Mourani from caucus because she spoke out harshly against the Charter. It was a singularly stupid move, one that everybody on the Charter side recognized as a supremely clumsy,  self inflicted wound with the direst of consequences.
After all, if the PQ cannot convince one of the most ardent separatists from the ethnic community of the worth of the Charter, how on Earth will they convince ordinary ethnics to come along for the ride?

I've no sympathy for Madame Marouni, a useful idiot extraordinaire who has tried, mostly in vain, to get Ethnics to ignore the ethnocentric nature of the sovereignty movement .
Maria Mourani is was as militant a separatist as they come, she was a founding member of the Mouvement Montréal français and was named as Patriot of the year by none other than the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal.
I wonder if she will be asked to return the award like Lance Armstrong who was forced to return his Olympic medals because of doping. Surely Madame Mourani has heaped a commensurate measure of humiliation upon the movement.

Mouroni, a maronite Christian from Lebanon gave an impassioned news conference on Friday denouncing the wedge politics of the PQ and then headed off to a mini-debate with none other than Louise Beaudoin on Radio Canada.

I make mention of the debate because Madame Beaudoin gave a hilarious performance where she actually lost her composure screaming at Mouroni that in order to be included as one of the family, the hijab had to go. Beaudoin became so enraged that the moderator had to grab her arm, in order to calm her down. This surreal exchange can be seen here, the good part taking place at the 5:00 minute mark. Watch the video

It occurred to me while watching the video that people like Beaudoin and Drainville are clueless as to what makes up the beliefs of people of faith.
To them, suspending one's religious commitment for a few hours a day is a reasonable and viable solution.
For an atheist it makes perfect sense, for a person of faith it is beyond the pale.

Should the law ever come to pass whereby teachers, nurses and doctors are subject to the removal of religious head wear, (it will never happen) there will be no doubt those who comply.
But make no mistake about it, there will be thousands who won't.
For them, commitment to religious principles trumps all and there isn't a chance in heck that they will conform, regardless of the repercussions.

I give as an example the great Los Angeles Dodger pitcher, Sandy Koufax, a three time MVP  and the author of an amazing four no hitters.
In 1965, the first game of the World Series fell on Yom Kippour, the holiest day of the year for Jews.  As the star of the team Koufax was slated to pitch but declined on religious grounds, despite the fact that he he wasn't particularly religious.
But to play on Yom Kippour would send a message to the Jewish community that he wasn't prepared to do. Read a stirring account.

"The Dodgers lost that game 8-2. Future Hall-of-Famer Don Drysdale, who started in Koufax's place, gave up seven runs in the first three innings. It is rumored that when Dodger manager Walter Alston headed out to the mound to take Drysdale out of the game he said, "I know, Skip. Right now you wish I was Jewish, too."
The rest of the story is that Koufax returned to start three of the remaining six games and was named the Series MVP after pitching a shutout in the deciding Game 7." Another link

It is perhaps, beyond the ability of Beaudoin, Marois and Drainville to understand religious commitment, for many Quebecers, faith cannot be suspended, put on or taken off, as a coat.

There are thousands of Sandy Koufaxs in Quebec, people who will never comply with the anti-religious edict, damn the torpedoes.
What will happen when a teacher shows up to class with a hijab in defiance of the  law? Will she be dragged out of the class?
How about a doctor or nurse who shows up to an emergency room shift in illegal attire?  Will they be refused the right to work and will patients be deprived of medical attention?
The truth is that those with options will leave rather than knuckle under and the sad reality is that the most talented are the ones who have the most options.
Will Quebec be better off and can we really afford to lose so many of our productive citizens or will the familiar Quebec refrain of "We don't need no stinkin' doctors/nurse/teachers be struck up once again?

In all of this I am convinced that the Charter of Secularism is the death rattle of the sovereignty movement, a last ditch effort to to play the ethnocentric card, because all else has failed.

It will not work.

Sovereignty has been dead for a long time, dumping on people of faith inside the ethnic community has washed away any chance of support the movement had outside White/Catholic/Francophones.

Die hard separatists, those who are open and truly inclusive (there are many) must be saddened that the ethnocentric caricature of the separatist movement as painted by opponents has turned out to true.

Separatism is not about building a French nation comprised of different elements, it is about exclusion of any and all who will not conform to the separatist ideal.

Sad, desperate and singularly illegal and unenforceable, that is the Charter of Secularism, another PQ masterpiece of failure.

French versus English Volume 91

Drainville's Master Plan to Eliminate Religion

There's a lot being said and printed over the subject of the proposed ban on religious wear here in Quebec, across Canada and around the world.

There's not much I can add that you haven't heard before, but I do remain surprised that nobody picked up on an exchange between Bernard Drainville and a reporter during his news conference.
The reporter asked whether these changes could apply to private industry and Drainville responded that he hoped so.
He told the reporter that many businesses were telling him that they wanted this type of legislation to apply to their workers.
Surprisingly, or not surprisingly, Drainville suggested that companies form policies based on the new rules for government workers.
What the minister let slip, is that it is his belief that secularism includes both the public and private sectors, elevating the debate to a whole new level.

Quebec Makes news around the world

Quebec Calls for Ban on Wearing Symbols of Faith New York Times

Quebec mulls religious head wear ban for public workers BBC (UK)

Jai.TV

 

Quebec: Ban Religious Headwear in Government Jobs ABC (US)

Quebec Government Proposes Ban on Religious Symbols Wall Street Journal

Quebec seeks to ban public workers from wearing religious symbols Reuters

Quebec Muslims slam proposed ban on religious headwear Al Jazeera (US)

Quebec quiere proscribir los signos religiosos en el sector público camineo.info (It)

Quebec prohibirá uso de símbolos religiosos en vida pública HispanTV

קוויבק אומרת "לא" לכיפה ולחיג'אב (Quebec says "no" kippa and hijab) Israel

Kanadyjski Quebec chce zakazać noszenia symboli religijnych Poland 

Québec: un projet de loi pour interdire les signes religieux Tunisia

كيبيك الكندية تقترب من حظر النقاب BBC Arabic

Québec wil geen tulband of keppel zien Netherlands

Канада: Квебек готов запретить религиозные символы Russia

 There are stories all over the world concerning the religious ban, but this one from Poland was perhaps the strangest ;

Zakaz noszenia krzyży zasłoną dymną dla eutanazji?
(Ban on wearing crosses a smokescreen for euthanasia?)

Charter debate claims first victim

"The debate is open now. People have the right to express themselves.... But I hope the debate will be done as serenely as possible.-Pauline Marois

Really? Perhaps Marois should reach for inspiration from Frank Costanza of Seinfeld fame, in repeating the mantra "Serenity Now"

 

"Quebec separatists are closing ranks around Premier Pauline Marois' proposed ban on religious symbols amid threats of boycotts and marches. The federal Bloc Quebecois party on Thursday expelled an MP for speaking out against the controversial measure that has caused deep divisions in the province.
Maria Mourani, an African-born Montrealer of Lebanese descent who wears a crucifix, had blasted Premier Pauline Marois' plans to bar all Quebec public servants from wearing religious symbols.
Mourani said the measure would divide Quebecers, as well as the sovereignty movement. Read the rest of the story

By the way, the comments under the story of her removal in the Journal de Montreal  are very telling.
90% were furious about it, even those in favour of the legislation.

Party member tweets his reaction to exclusion.

boreal49 "I do not agree with Ms. Mourani, because I support the charter of secularism. But this lady is entitled to her opinion. Even within a political party, a member should be able to issue a dissenting opinion without being deported, it's called democracy.
The Bloc leader is acting as an Iman forcing their members to practice the doctrine: "Do this and you will live"

 minos1429 Now we clearly see the drastic methods of the PQ that will come after a referendum and how they will reign when they have their own country, a dictatorship of oppressive laws over freedom of speech or religious belief, becoming a worse banana republic than Cuba ....
EBeaudoin Long live freedom of speech?
The worst part of this story is that she did not speak against her own party but rather against the PQ project!
Is the Bloc under the command of Her Majesty the PM?

Mr. Paillé, head of the Bloc Quebecois is going to get roasted by the press and even his own supporters. It's always fun to see a major political blunder up close and personal and I wouldn't be surprised that once the gravity of the error sets in, he'll be eating a double portion of humble pie, begging Mourani to return to the fold.

Lily-white Public service backs Charter

I guess it's no big surprise that the 42,000 strong union representing public employees leapt to the defense of the proposed charter.
The incestuousness relationship between the union and the PQ is a case of one hand washing the other.

"The SFPQ union, which has 42,000 members, applauds the government for "finally" tabling a policy that would ensure the religious neutrality of government offices.
The PQ plan would forbid Quebec's public employees from wearing more visible religious symbols -- including hijabs, turbans, yarmulkes and larger-than-average crucifixes.
"We're obliged to keep our political opinions to ourselves," union president Lucie Martineau said Wednesday.
"We want that extended to our religious opinions."
Other unions have said they plan to consult members before taking a public position." Link

 But the union must be one of the most ethnically pure in the world, with less than 2% visible minorities and the rest white Catholic francophones.
I guess the union wants to keep it that way.
So how many hijab-wearing members actually work for the union? Forget about kippahs and turbans, I'd venture there are none of those.
When asked how many members wear the hijab, the union leaders were stumped.
So let's take a stab at it for giggles.
42,000 union members divided by 1.8 % who are visible minorities=  738
738 members multiplied by 60% (eliminating the men) = 442
442 divided by those visible minorities who are not Muslim (66%) = 176
Percentage of Muslim union members who wear a hijab (10%) = 17
Now the numbers above are guess work, but you can you see that not many SFPQ union members wear the hijab.
This is what all the fuss is about.

Perhaps Quebecers should better consider this well documented fact;

“In 1980, recent immigrant men who had some employment income earned 85 cents for each dollar received by Canadian-born men. By 2005, the ratio had dropped to 63 cents. The corresponding numbers for recent immigrant women were 85 cents and 56 cents, respectively.” Link

 

Animal Cruelty piece generates accusations of Quebec-bashing

I received a few emails about the blog piece entitled  Is Animal Cruelty Part of Quebec Values? 
accusing me of Quebec bashing.
I don't usually respond but I did leave out a few things in that piece that I should have mentioned.

All this is in response to  a woman who started an online petition asking Kijiji to stop advertising pet sales because many unscrupulous puppy mills were using the service.
The petition has already garnered over 50,000 signatures
Read the story
Sign the petition

In my defense of calling animal abuse a particular Quebec value, I am going to excerpt  an article by Gilles Proulx, in which he actually goes farther than me.

"There is a value that the vast majority of  "Anglos" would be happy to see included on the docket of the Quebec Parliament when it resumes sitting.  I want to talk about respect for animals and the need to end impunity for torturers of animals that Quebec does almost nothing about, dishing out punishment not worthy of the name. My brave Golden, Romeo and I will be attending the March 4 legs organized by the SPCA on Sunday, September 8 , on Mount Royal, to remind the Deputy Prime Minister François Gendron it is time to put the love of animals on the agenda. We should be ashamed and live up to the example of the neighboring provinces in the treatment of animals because we Quebecers are always the last in the class. Even within Quebec, an inordinate proportion of Anglophones stand above us and sometimes volunteer at their own expense in charitable organizations for our animals....

.....In recent months, Quebec has further illustrated itself as a dunce in the treatment of animals. Many horrific crimes or negligence have blackened the pages of this Journal. Remember those patients who drowned their pit bull by placing weights around  its neck. Not to mention that maniac who probably thought himself manly for strafing nails into the skull of another poor animal. In October, there was the case of Black Jack, a horse pulling a carriage in the Old Port which fell down due to dehydration and exhaustion because he was kept at work for twelve hours a day. Rescued by good Samaritans, Black Jack will end his days in a rural landscape of Lac Saint-Jean. Fortunately, the story was about him.  As for the exploiter who almost killed this noble animal, don't worry: The justice system is not going to take notice. This is Quebec." Read the entire story in French

Who's Quebec-bashing now?

Is Mr. Proulx perhaps mellowing?

Nah........I don't think so!

FULL DISCLOSURE.
I bought my puppy through Kijiji, a special non-shedding Jack Russell Terrier which was hard to find.
I drove to St-Hyacinthe and met the young couple who bred dogs as a family income supplement.
There was so much love for the dogs in their home and such happy and bouncy dogs, we immediately fell in love with the runt of the litter.
Before the couple turned the puppy over  to us, they asked us a million questions about our background, the conditions that the dog would face and our record as dog owners.
We made a deal and Brody has been with us for six years, a delightful companion, rakishly handsome and intelligent and loving. He hasn't a mean bone in his body and has never bitten or snarled.

Had conditions been less than acceptable at the breeders, we would have fled.
But not everybody on Kijiji is a scam artist....just saying.

McGill University sinking like a lead balloon.

"Three days into her new job as McGill University’s principal, Suzanne Fortier was dealing with the news Monday that the school was surpassed for the first time by its rival, the University of Toronto, in the latest QS World University Rankings.....
....McGill — long considered the Harvard of the north — has been slipping in some recent rankings, such as the World Reputation Rankings and the 2012 Times Higher Education world rankings.
.....Danny Byrne, editor of topuniversities.com, which publishes the QS rankings, said when they asked 62,000 academics around the world which universities are leaders in research, U of T “did brilliantly,” ranking 13th compared to 31st for McGill"

Hate to say it.....but told you so....

EI contribution freeze, a political move meant to freeze Quebec out

"Employers and workers will get a small break over the next three years as the Conservative government freezes employment insurance premiums at the current level.
Planned rate increases are no longer necessary because the separate account through which the government manages the fund is looking healthier than it did a few years ago, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said Monday.
Finance Department staff estimated the freeze will save businesses and workers $660 million next year, something that Flaherty believes will give employers the flexibility to hire more staff. Link

The news behind the story is that the Conservatives are applying more political pressure on Quebec which has been making noises about repatriating the Employment Insurance fund to its own jurisdiction. The idea is utterly ridiculous and a complete nonstarter, because Quebecers take almost twice as much out of the fund as they put in.

Now in the past, when the fund piled up a huge surplus, the federal government just scooped it up and transferred it to the general fund.
Harper is not going to let this happen as Quebec will scream about the surplus being 'robbed' from the fund, instead of paying lazy Gaspesians.

....and in another installment of  'Payback's a bitch '

"Quebec business and labour groups have flooded the Finance Department with demands to save a tax credit the Harper government plans to kill.
The spring budget announced the pending demise of a 15 per cent tax credit for investments in Labour Sponsored Venture Capital Corporations.....
The union-backed mutual funds are focused on helping small and medium-size firms create jobs.
The program, costing the federal treasury about $140 million a year, is wildly popular in Quebec where about 88 per cent of the tax credit is claimed.
 ....It’s a success story, especially in Quebec,” New Democrat labour critic Alexandre Boulerice said in an interview, adding the funds have supported 600,000 jobs in the province while helping people save for retirement.
“If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.”
But the federal government says the funds are not working, with poor investment returns, weak accountability and dubious ability to raise fresh venture capital. Read the whole story

Game, set and match, Mr. Harper

Odds'n Ends

Cruising the vigile.net website I clicked on a link to Louis Prefontaine's www.louisprefontaine.com
Now Louis hasn't been blogging for a while but I think he should have coughed up the $8 a year to keep his domain from lapsing.
It seems that a Japanese hair removal seller has scooped up the domain, although why, I cannot fathom.

*************

Here's two rather contradictory headlines that I saw on the same day.

"Pipeline would bring $ 6.3 billion to Quebec's GDP " Journal de Montreal {fr}
"Enbridge project unprofitable and highly damaging" La Presse {fr}

*************

A constant source of amusement here in Quebec are Google translation gaffes.
Even the RCMP has committed the faux pas of using the utterly unreliable, but free translation service.
So it's no wonder that cheapskate Walmart got caught with a doozy, when it translated dumbbell (weightlifting equipment) as 'imbecile' Link

Ha! Ha!

Idiot PQ quote of the Week

"Off the top, Health Minister Réjean Hébert was asked whether he fears nurses or medical personnel could be lost or might quit over new rules prohibiting them from wearing conspicuous religious items.
Hébert dismissed the idea as fear mongering.
“We saw the same reaction in the debate leading up to Bill 101,” Hébert said on his way into a meeting of the cabinet. “And the anticipated exodus did not happen. So I am not worried.” Link

Interesting letter to the editor

I've translated this letter to the editor that I found in the Journal du Quebec.

If you read French, do the author the courtesy of reading it HERE

"As to the Quebec Charter of values​​, and to a lesser degree, questions about the teaching of history to young Quebecers, I am still amazed that the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in 1759 is still perceived today as the decisive moment of the British victory over the French.

In early 1758, William Pitt convinced the British government to invest large sums of money to finance the armada that appeared before Quebec in June 1759 with the very objective to expel the French from North America. Meanwhile, in France, by the middle of 1758, the loss of New France was already a foregone conclusion.

Some people like to raise the specter of Lord Durham assimilation after the French conquest. However, the fact to retain is that the British gave to the French who decided to stay in Quebec, freedom of religion, Catholicism, and the French language .

If, by some miracle, the French had resisted the British invaders in 1759, it is unlikely that the miracle would be repeated during the attempted invasion by the Americans at Quebec in 1775. The attack was repulsed by the British, supported by the remaining French Canadians. New France had long been forgotten by its motherland by 1812, when the British scored a victory against the Americans in the Niagara region.

Quebec today is largely French today thanks to the British.

François Vézina

Ontario Hospital set to poach medical staff

"A hospital in Ontario is trying to appeal to medical students in Quebec with an attention-grabbing new recruitment ad.

Lakeridge Health Oshawa’s new campaign, to be featured next week in The McGill Daily school newspaper, is already a social media success.It depicts a woman wearing a pink hijab, lab coat and stethoscope with the slogan, “We don’t care what’s on your head, we care what’s in it.”"   Link

Have a great Weekend! 

Bonne fin de semaine!

Is Animal Cruelty Part of Quebec Values?

It's somewhat disconcerting to listen to Quebecers drone on about those infamous Quebec values as if those who live here are more open and fair-minded then anywhere else in Canada.
This is the rationale employed by the PQ to assert the need for Quebec's very own set of societal rules.

It's a slick, albeit dishonest ploy, flattering Quebecers with the nonsense that they are better, in order to win electoral favour.

It's like telling an ugly person that he or she is handsome or beautiful. Even though that deep down they know they're ugly, the compliment is deeply appreciated and welcomed. Let's be honest, who of us is not susceptible.

And so, if Quebecers accept the PQ version that they are kinder and gentler than Canadians, the Charter makes sense, an affirmation of that view.

It has become part of the great separatist narrative that Quebecers are more environmentally friendly, socially responsible and in possession of values morally superior to those in the ROC, when in fact nothing could be farther from the truth.
We'll get back to that superiority complex, later in the post.

Have you noticed that every PQ defender of the proposed Charter of Quebec Values, (or changes to the present Quebec Charter of human rights and freedoms,)  starts off the discussion with the same refrain, the principle of equality between men and woman?
Every time I hear the assertion, I ask myself in which Canadian province or American state is there a codified regulation or rule that stipulates that men have entrenched rights superior to women.
The truth of course is that we already have a Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that guarantees gender equality, this since 1982.

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

In the comments section of the Journal de Montreal, I found this humorous exchange, one that actually sums up the reality surrounding the question of Quebec Values.

Christian Langlois
Can somebody name one great Quebec value that isn't already included in the Charter of Rights and Liberties?
     JM B-49
     Shepard's pie and baked beans!
           RFIDNATOR
           and poutine! poutine???

So why start off the 'values' debate claiming ownership of a right that is already fully entrenched in law and which ALL Canadians, including Quebecers are already subject to?
Why?
Because playing the gender equality card is actually a clever sales ploy, the famous 'bait and switch' tactic that dishonest sellers employ to fool customers.

"Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud used in retail sales but also employed in other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by merchants' advertising products or services at a low price, but when customers visit the store, they discover that the advertised goods are not available, or the customers are pressured by sales people to consider similar, but higher priced items ("switching"). Wikipedia

Including rights that we already own and cherish within the proposed Quebec Charter of Values makes the nasty bits that follow easier to accept.
Or as Mary Poppins told us, "A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down!"

Bernard Drainville, as slimy a politician as I have ever seen, deposited his draft law yesterday, prohibiting the wearing of religious symbols in public schools, the government, and just about everywhere the government has influence.
I know that I predicted that the interdiction wouldn't apply to doctors and nurses and even though he announced that it would, I remain convinced that in the end, the medical profession will be left alone.

As for Drainville, I cannot stomach this loathsome excuse for a politician who oozes disdain for minorities while feigning concern. When asked by a reporter if he found it normal that under the law, the Premier of the province could wear a hijab or kippah, but not a public servant, Drainville retorted sarcastically, that it remains to be seen if Quebecers would vote for a Hijab clad candidate for Premier.
What a charmer!

Drainville justified his proposed law based on the popular support of the people. If the people want it, it must be right!

Now leaders must listen to the people, but in the end they must do what is right, not what is necessarily popular.

I am reminded of President John F. Kennedy, who imposed desegregation across the United States against the popular will of the people.
In 1963, when faced with resistance in the South, he held firm, to the point where he sent in the National Guard to enforce desegregation at the University of Alabama.
It was a gripping confrontation between popular sentiment and the emerging political principle of equality. There was violent opposition, rioting, injuries and even deaths. But Kennedy remained resolute.

Had you asked Americans back then if they agreed with the principal of equal opportunity for Blacks, you'd have found that the majority were against the idea.
Kennedy delivered the country a stunning lesson in leadership, doing what was right, not what was popular.
The rest is history!.... Read a gripping account 

Here in Quebec, leadership means doing the bidding of the mob, if it will help with reelection. And so Mr. Drainville, all I can say, (with apologies to Lloyd Bentsen) is that "You're no Jack Kennedy"

In a hysterical reaction on the French news station LCN, the text crawl under the commentators read:

"response to accommodation crisis"
"Crisis" What crisis?
I'll tell you what a real crisis is.... losing forty-thousand jobs under the year-old PQ regime!

Now back to those wonderfully superior Quebec values that the PQ is so very proud of.

Just a few days ago, we were treated to another raid on another Quebec puppy mill, as sickening a story as you can imagine, emaciated and sick dogs, raised in filthy conditions. It happens all too often in Quebec. Read: Montreal SPCA seizes 90 dogs from South Shore puppy mill
Unfortunately, cruelty to animals is a value that separates Quebec from Canada.

Quebec ranks at the bottom of the list of provinces. Link

And let us remember those other values that separate Quebecers from Canadians, the miserly attitude towards charity and volunteerism. Read Quebec's Hoity-Toity, Self-Righteous Delusion of Superiority

I wonder if these Quebec values will be enshrined  in the legislation, to go along with that other great Quebec value..intolerance.

Preserving French in Quebec: The Elephant in the Room

There is a certain freedom that blogging independently affords, there are no editors to tone down your piece because it isn't politically correct, or advertisers who can exert pressure, regardless of the truthfulness or veracity of your contentions.

And so here goes, a no holds bar assessment of the current situation in regards to Quebec's failed policy that attempts to cure its declining population through an ill-conceived immigration program that focuses on language instead of quality.
Regardless of political affiliation, most Quebecers (and probably you) understand the policy to be a failure, yet there doesn't seem to be a realistic alternative.

It remains that we can either accept high quality immigrants who don't speak French and are likely to assimilate into the English community or we can accept unqualified French-speaking immigrants, who while fulfilling the language criterion, are unproductive, as well as difficult to assimilate into the French milieu, because of religion, culture and social upbringing.
It is a classic case of being firmly positioned between a rock and a hard place (entre l'arbe et la corse,) the first choice leading to either a demographic rise in the dreaded English community or alternately, economic mediocrity and social cleavage.
Not an appetizing choice for francophone Quebecers, who don't like what is happening, but remain powerless (or so it seems) to change the dynamic.

Quebec has made the choice of what it perceives as the lesser of two evils, accepting religiously orthodox, French-speaking immigrants from the Maghreb, who through no fault of their own, are extremely hard to assimilate, lacking the skills and temperament necessary for success in a modern western democracy. These immigrants come from a society that is fundamentally different from ours, where religion trumps everything, where women and children are treated like chattel and where human rights and freedom of speech are concepts as strange and alien as poutine in Benghazi.
As we've seen in country after country in Europe, the policy of entering North African Muslims has been disastrous and has led to economic decline and social upheaval.
It doesn't even have anything to do with language. Despite the fact that immigrants from the Maghreb speak French, they haven't assimilated in France any better than those living in Germany or Scandinavia.
My apologies to the 70% of Maghrebiens who have done well here and assimilated, they remain the majority, but alas not enough statistically. A 30% unemployment rate is unacceptable in a functioning and successful society.
Plus it doesn't take more than a tiny percentage of fundamentalists to create havoc.

If the PQ really believe that Quebec can and will be more successful than the rest of the world in assimilating these immigrants, they are as we say, quite off their rocker.

Unfortunately, the worldwide French-speaking immigrant pool is exceedingly shallow, after all, 95% of the world doesn't speak French and choosing from the remaining 5% makes for some slim pickings, considering that the French from France and Belgium are not keen to emigrate here.
And so Quebec accepts thousands of unskilled, orthodox Muslims from the Maghreb each year, those who fulfill the language criterion, but little else.

Now before I offer a solution, one that can perhaps change the dynamic described above, I want to put forward a notion that nobody in the mainstream press is willing to discuss, namely whether Francophones really care about saving their heritage or language and  if they do, why are they unwilling to sacrifice for it.

There is of course the simplest of solutions to the demographic problem, the elephant in the room, the answer to the problem that Francophones refuse to consider or even discuss.

....have more babies.

It wouldn't take much effort, if half the francophone population committed to just one more child per family, not one immigrant would be required.

This fact is not lost on anyone in the debate, but remains taboo, a topic decidedly off limit.
So why don't the Mario Beaulieus, the Gilles Proulxs, the Jean-Paul Perreaults and the rabidly separatist minions on vigile.net advocate for a higher francophone birth rate?
How come this solution is off the table?

Is it because the militants understand that the idea is laughable in a world where small families are de rigueur and Quebecers (like all Westerners)  are not willing to give up vacations, leisure and financial security in favour of a third child.

So much for the preservation of the French language and culture in North America, nationalists are unwilling to do what they must do, preferring to put the onus on Anglos and immigrants to protect French.
Slice it however you want, francophones want Anglophones and ethnics to sacrifice their heritage and culture so that French may persevere, while francophones themselves refuse to lift a finger to preserve their own identity.

Let us remember the immortal words of US President John F. Kennedy who said; 
"...ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

...and paraphrase it as such;
"Ask not what Anglos and Ethnics can do for Quebec, Ask what Francophones can do for themselves."

And so I put the question to Quebec language militants;
Why should we sacrifice, if you will not...

I defy those who oppose my views to make a cogent argument that avoids deflection or the traditional ad hominum attack.

Hmmmm......Let's move on.....

I've given a lot of thought about the problem of the preservation of the French language in Quebec with an eye to coming up with a solution.
Somewhere buried in a statistical report by the department in charge of immigration is a breakdown of the languages spoken by immigrants upon immigration.
Of course some speak French to varying degrees, some English or some English and French, again to varying degrees, but most interestingly about 20% speak neither English or French.

And then I had my eureka moment.
I call it the Tabula Rasa solution.

Instead of demanding more immigrants speak French ( a failed policy) think about those that speak neither English or French.
Now English may dominate the world, but the number of people who speak no English towers above those who do speak French. All of a sudden the pool of potential immigrants expands exponentially.

Let us concentrate on quality immigrants from countries or cultures that do not have a historical affiliation with the English community in Quebec, but who possess other traits that more closely resemble our society and from this pool, select those that speak absolutely no English.

From here it becomes a challenge to assimilate these immigrants into the French side of the language equation and this can be done by making it a condition of immigration that they attend a formation school for between six and nine months that will forge them into citizens more comfortable in French than English.
This immigrant school can be fashioned after the Israeli ' Ulpan' experience, where Jewish immigrants  to Israel, who don't speak Hebrew or are unfamiliar with the culture are given an intensive and comprehensive schooling into the culture of Israel and the language of Hebrew.

These immigrants would contract to remain in Quebec until they become Canadian citizens, as well as having their citizenship conditional on learning French.

It would be expensive, but cost less than having immigrants remain on the dole for years, the important element that those selected be high quality 'winners.'

The idea may be novel and the solution outside the box, but frankly, nobody has offered anything better, so giving it a try merits the effort.

As for forcing immigrants to assimilate into the French side of the linguistic equation, I cannot be against the concept.
Given the attractiveness of English, there will always be enough bleed over to the English side to keep things proportional.

To those who accuse me of always being negative, I thus present an interesting alternative to our present immigration fiasco.

Don't say I didn't try.....