The Trouble with Sovereignty, Part 1.. A Deal is a Deal.

Deception...part of the PQ's sovereignty plan

I am going to write a series of blogs pieces concerning some very basic principles relating to the sovereignty debate, ones that I hope will provoke debate. I won't get into the tiny details, because to do so would trigger the  automatic naysayer debate that always bogs down the discussion. I will try to limit the use of statistics and numbers, to the best of my ability.

Sovereigntists, as we see in our comments sections, are adept at denial, twisting and spinning and use the minutest of facts to confound the debate.

So what I'll write is simple and to the point, and I appreciate comments that pertain only to the subject at hand, because we have many more pieces of this sort in the future, covering all aspects of the sovereignty issue.

It's funny how sovereigntists constantly militate for an independent Quebec while continuing to ignore, consider or  publicly debate the actual modalities or repercussions, as if the consequences are no matter, akin to the Rapture, where all that matters is the actual event itself.

Not since the last referendum have sovereigntists considered the realities of leaving Canada and when then PQ minister Richard le Hir conducted some internal studies about the economic ramifications of sovereignty, the results were so unfavourable that the whole thing was downplayed and in fact trivialized by Lucien Bouchard, who when questioned about  the studies in the middle of the referendum campaign disavowed their legitimacy by saying;

"They aren't mine, they belong to Richard LeHir. It's in the past, part of an old campaign"

It has been the narrow policy of sovereigntists to discuss ad nauseam the road to sovereignty without ever discussing, speculation or assessing the effects, the day after, the year after or the decade after.

Where have you seen any reasonable attempt to describe Quebec after Canada, both socially, politically or economically? You'd think separatists would wax eloquently over the subject on the pages of vigile.net, but 99% of the conversations are about achieving the Holy Grail of sovereignty and getting out of the rat-trap that Canada is perceived to be.
The future of an independent Quebec after Canada according to sovereigntists is, as Doris Day sang.. 'Que Sera Sera!'

Let us start by broaching a few uncomfortable subjects, starting with the right of Quebecers to determine for themselves the prerogative to secede from Canada.

So today we'll discus the prepostebrous notion that it is up to Quebec to decide its future and whether that decision is Quebec's alone.

A very quick review of history, before we proceed.
After the referendum loss in 1995, the federal government tabled a law called the Clarity Act that set forth conditions and rules that could lead to Quebec sovereignty following a successful referendum.

"The Clarity Act is legislation passed by the Parliament of Canada that established the conditions under which the Government of Canada would enter into negotiations that might lead to secession following such a vote by one of the provinces.
Although the law could theoretically be applied to any province, the Clarity Act was created in response to the 1995 Quebec referendum and ongoing independence movement in that province. The content of the Clarity Act was based on the 1998 secession reference to the Supreme Court of Canada made by the federal government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
Two days after the Clarity Act had been introduced in the Canadian House of Commons, the Parti Québécois government passed Bill 99 an act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State in the National Assembly of Quebec." Wikipedia

In essence, Quebec's Bill 99 thumbed its nose at the Clarity Act declaring that Quebec wouldn't necessarily abide by its provision, (not quite, but close enough)

My friend Brent Tyler is contesting the validity of Bill 99 and will have his day in court next year. You might recall that Ottawa recently decided to get involved in that case as an intervenor on the side led by Tyler opposing the law.
This freaked out the Quebec government because they've been advised by their own lawyers that the law is a dog and will be struck down, and  the fact is that Ottawa's involvement will make the loss more painful.
In response the Quebec National Assembly passed a unanimous motion (yes our useful idiot Anglo MPs voted for the motion) denouncing Ottawa's participation. Link

"The parties in Quebec's legislature all voted in favour of a motion Wednesday to denounce the federal government's court challenge of a 13-year-old provincial law known as Bill 99 on the rules for Quebec sovereignty.
The legislature called on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government to withdraw its participation in a legal challenge, filed in Quebec Superior Court last week.
The motion tabled by Premier Pauline Marois "condemns the intrusion by the Government of Canada into Quebec democracy." Link

All right, enough with the boring historical stuff, it all comes down to this question.
Can Quebecers decide on their own whether to secede from Canada and under what conditions that decision would be based on?

Canada's position.....NO.
Quebec's position...YES.

You can easily imagine how seductive to Quebecers the idea is, that they alone can decide their future.
But unfortunately our society doesn't work like that, we can't always get what we want and seldom do.
We don't decide on what we pay for products or services and if Quebecers voted unanimously in a referendum for $1 gas at the pumps, they wouldn't get that neither.
Our society operates on the holy principle that a deal is a deal and that no party can modify that deal without the consent of the other, or by another clearly defined process clearly outlined in law.

Quebec has been a party to the BNA act that binds it to Canada for over 140 years and while there are those who would argue that the people of Quebec were forced into the union, it is a little too late to complain.

For 147 years Quebec has benefited from its inclusion in Canada and has been a willing partner in the social, economic and political fabric of Canada. Quebec on two occasions has reaffirmed this commitment, so there is no pretending that the province isn't bound by the terms of the agreement of union. In fact the referendum rejections actually undermine completely any attempt by sovereigntists to assert that they are in confederation under duress.

So Quebec is intrinsically part of Canada and bound by the terms of union.  Extricating itself from Canada is not as easy as saying 'I want out' because there is a contract that cannot be abrogated without consent of the other party or parties.
It is the same for the other nine provinces who cannot kick Quebec out of Canada without Quebec's consent, even if a majority of those in the ROC vote to do so via a referendum.
You can't change a contract without the other party's agreement. Period. End of discussion.

Try telling Rogers that you no longer want to use their services or the bank that you no longer feel bound by the mortgage agreement and that the decision is yours and your's alone to make. Think they'll agree?
Perhaps you are an obnoxious tenant in your apartment building and the majority of the other residents vote to kick you out. Do you think that the vote would have legal standing?

It is easy for Quebecers to believe that they and they alone may modify the terms of union, it just seems so right that if a majority of Quebecers want out, their will should prevail.
But it doesn't work that way...

Imagine the people of Newfoundland holding a referendum deciding whether they should withdraw from the terms of the contract agreement for power with Hydro-Quebec.
I imagine that 95% of the Newfoundlanders and Labradoreans would vote to abrogate the deal.

But I also I imagine Quebec would object, telling the Newfies that a deal is a deal and that no referendum can modify the terms of a contract, not without Hydro-Quebec's consent.
Just because the Newfoundlanders vote to cut ties with Hydro-Quebec, they plainly can't do it.
In fact the Supreme Court has already told Newfoundland the exact same thing.
 Tough noogies, a deal's a deal.

The Clarity Act is actually a godsend to Quebec separatists, because it is a legal road map to achieving independence.

Ask a clear and unambiguous question and get a clear majority. Voila!

The only issue to be decided is what that clear majority might be and that issue should represent the entire debate.
Quebec telling the rest of the country that it is their decision alone to decide on the terms of divorce is patently ludicrous.

Stephane Dion made known these facts known to Quebec through a series of three professorial letters directed at Quebec leaders in person and the public in general. While the message and the messenger were not to the liking of separatists, Dion was indeed pointing out the stark reality of Quebec succession. I'm reprinting this analysis because it is worthy of our respect.

"In the first open letter, Dion challenged three assertions that Bouchard had made: that a unilateral declaration of independence is supported by international law, that a majority of "50% plus one" was a sufficient threshold for secession, and that international law would protect the territorial integrity of Quebec following a secession. Against the first assertion, Dion argued that the vast majority of international law experts "believe that the right to declare secession unilaterally does not belong to constituent entities of a democratic country such as Canada." In regard to the simple majority argument, Dion argues that due to the momentous changes to Quebecers' lives that would result from secession, a simple majority that could disappear in the face of difficulties would be insufficient to ensure the political legitimacy of the sovereigntist project. In regard to the territorial integrity of Quebec, Dion retorts that "there is neither a paragraph nor a line in international law that protects Quebec's territory but not Canada's. International experience demonstrates that the borders of the entity seeking independence can be called into question, sometimes for reasons based on democracy."
In Dion's second open letter to Jacques Brassard, Quebec's intergovernmental affairs minister, Dion expands upon his earlier arguments against the territorial integrity of Quebec following secession by highlighting the inconsistency in the argument that Canada is divisible but Quebec is not. Secondly, Dion underscores that without recognition by the Government of Canada and when opposed by a strong minority of citizens, a unilateral declaration of independence faces much difficulty in gaining international recognition.
In Dion's third open letter to Lucien Bouchard, he criticizes the Quebec premier for accepting some aspects of the Supreme Court ruling on Secession (such as the political obligation for the Government of Canada to negotiate secession following a clear expression of will from the people of Quebec) and not other sections of the ruling (such as the need for a clear majority on a clear question and the unconstitutionality of a unilateral declaration of independence). In regard to the ruling, Dion makes three claims: that the federal government has a role in the selection of the question and the level of support required for it to pass, that secession can only be achieved through negotiation rather than a "unilateral declaration of independence", and that the terms of negotiation could not be decided solely by the Government of Quebec. Wikipedia

Quebec needs Canada's approval to separate, because a deal's a deal.
The only other path is a unilateral declaration of independence, whereby Quebec tells Canada that it is independent without permission, a scenario that even Quebecers would reject, because those situations lead to partition and possibly armed conflict.

Leading up to the legal challenge over Bill 99 next year and Mr. Tyler's contention that Quebec cannot decide its future unilaterally, what is important to remember is that a 'deal is a deal'....just ask the Newfies.

French versus English Volume 96

Jewish General Hospital and Quebec Daycare Association to PQ..... "UP YOURS!!"

JGH to PQ...."Non merci"

L'Association des garderies privées du Québec (Que. Assoc. of Private Day cares) has withdrawn its objection to the proposed Charter of Values, not because they are giving up the fight, but rather because they've decided  to ignore the law if passed, damn the consequences.
The daycare association boasts so many employees who wear the headscarf, that to comply with the proposed law, would bring down the network. The spokesman added that the network will continue to hire qualified teachers, even if they wear the veil.

"There is no study that shows that the wearing of  the headscarf affects the development of the child negatively, no cause and effect. I think  Minister Bernard Drainville is talking out of his hat, says Sylvain Lévesque. These are qualified and patient women, who have a vocation and are doing excellent work with children, " he added. Link{fr}

At the assembly of the Association in Montreal last week, members passed this resolution;

"No one will be excluded and dismissed for rules imposed by a state that promotes division, exclusion, strife and discord for ideological purposes. "  Link{fr}

In the meantime the Jewish General Hospital is making its displeasure known, hinting that they too will ignore the law, deeming it unconstitutional.
At the JGH, almost 30% of employees would violate the proposed law, including critical employees, like emergency room doctors. The hospital could not possibly replace these employees and is well aware that the government's assumption that most would remove their symbols is patently naive. Read: Jewish General may disobey secularism charter

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

Now all this talk of the Charter of Values has raised some ugly sentiments from militant secularists in relation to the Jewish General Hospital.

Hasidic Jew... side locks

As those who follow Quebec politics closely know, a PQ candidate running in a by-election in Montreal was caught up in a controversy when some comments she made on her Facebook page came to light.

Tania Longpré  is the sacrificial lamb running for the PQ in Viau in Montreal, an ethnic riding that will go Liberal no matter what.
In the political vernacular of Quebec politics, she is a "poteau," (pole) someone who puts up election posters on telephone poles to defend the party colours in hostile territory and runs only to satisfy the minority who support the party in the riding.
'POTEAUS'  have no expectation of winning and these candidates are positions usually filled by young party militants hoping for a political payoff should the party they represent win power.

Now Ms. Longpré is not politically discrete,  (Ne pas avoir la langue dans sa poche.) She is actually nothing more than an ignorant loudmouth, with intellect that matches her beauty. (yes..that was meant to be cruel)

When asked on Facebook if she agreed that the Jewish General hospital should drop the word 'Jewish' from its appellation and refrain from performing religious circumcisions, as well as barring Jewish employees of the hospital from wearing peyos, a tradition among ultra-religious Jews, none of whom, by the way, work in the public service, she enthusiastically answered.
"Against, against against."

When asked  by that same interlocutor to clearly and publicly answer whether the Charter of Values should include provisions to remove the word 'Jewish' from the JGH and whether circumcision be banned as well as the kippah and side locks from the public service, Ms. Longpré  answered. "I SAID yes!

 When confronted by reporters, Ms. Longpré backed away from her position claiming that what somebody says on Facebook shouldn't be considered definitive and that she was in fact, the target of a smear campaign. Link{fr}
Digging a little further, reporters found some other embarrassing public statements made by Longpré, including disparaging remarks about the PQ in general and Pauline Marois in particular. Link

By the way, for those rednecks who believe it is unreasonable in the modern age of Quebec secularism for a public institution like a hospital to have a religiously based name (like the 'Jewish General Hospital,' I offer this list of primary care hospitals in Quebec that violate that principle;

Centre hospitalier Hôtel-Dieu d'Amos
Hôpital de Notre-Dame-du-Lac
Centre hospitalier Saint-Francois
Centre hospitalier Notre-Dame du Chemin
Hôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus
Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement
Hôtel-Dieu de Québec
Saint-Francois d'Assise
Hôpital, CLSC et Centre d'hébergement Christ-Roi
Hôpital de Saint-Georges
Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis
Hôtel-Dieu de Sherbrooke (CHUS)
Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu de Gaspé
Hôpital de Sainte-Anne-des-Monts
Hôtel-Dieu de Sorel
Hôpital Notre-Dame du CHUM
Hôpital Sainte-Anne
Hôpital Saint-Luc du CHUM
Hôtel-Dieu du CHUM
Centre hospitalier de St. Mary
Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal
Hôpital Santa Cabrini

Hôpital Géneral Juif (Jewish General Hospital)........ unacceptable


The Charter debate has opened the door to some pretty  racist comments, snuck in under the guise of honest debate. If you think the comments on this blog are inflammatory, you haven't been reading the mainstream press lately.

Translation: Lucky the PQ is a good sport. If it was me, symbols would be allowed, but there wouldn't be any synagogues or mosques. Link{fr} 
 

Now I've read thousands of comments in the French press in relation to the Charter and have come to the unscientific conclusion that the readers of the decidedly low-brow Journal de Montreal are much more anti-charter than readers of Le Devoir.
I actually thought it would be the other way around, but then, the vast majority of Le Devoir readers are separatists, so I guess it makes sense.

Here's an exchange in the comments section of the JdeM that caught my attention. It appeared under the story of Tania Longpré 

Alain Mourani : She is representative of unbridled xenophobia, which once public, spreads unashamedly. It is for the benefit if the peanut gallery, the PQ understands that its chances of an election win in that riding is equal to zero. Muslims were, until now, the scapegoats, but now the Jews are back ... not to mention that in the Jewish hospital, anyone will be very well cared for, and in French, unlike the claims of the ignorant mass  of morons. It was created because of the opposition of good Catholic clergy Quebec and its political cronies ... to let the Jews practice as physicians ...Now Muslims, tomorrow others and that's the xenophobia in the Republic of the Quebec ... Kébecquistan 

 Morrisette Paul: You lied, it is in the Quebec Parliament where the first Jew in Canada was admitted.  It is in the University of Montreal where  the Jews refused in McGill, turned to. It was the English Prime Minister of Canada who claimed that Hitler was a great statesman, a man he admired. It was the Canadian government that refused a ship of Jewish refugees who were returned to be taken by the Germans and whose occupants perished in concentration camps

Alain Mourani: Well, I can also cite the example of Adrien Arcand, a pure Nazi... the question isn't there. The Jewish hospital exists because cathos refused Jewish doctors the right to practice in the cathos hospitals. Giving me some historical facts does not change the present situation. I have a collection of anti-Semitic posters from 1945 to 1955, in French, posters used by municipalities like St. Agathe, to complain about the invasion of the Jews, their refusal to integrate ... etc.. Just look at the current deleterious climate to understand that the latent xenophobia speaks now without restraint. Before we had a little discomfort in expressing it. ... Link{fr}

Read: An open letter to Tania Longpre from a surgeon in the Jewish General Hospital

Here's my solution to the impasse.....

Let the government take over the JGH and install a new secular administration, rename the hospital more appropriately, perhaps Hopital Abbé Lionel Groulx .
Get rid of all the Prots, Anglos, Jews, Muslims and pesky immigrants who work in the hospital and replace them with unilingual Francophones. Rename all the pavilions and buildings which up to now,  honour generous patrons and donors, with famous Montreal Canadiens hockey players.

....then pay back the almost 1 billion dollars that the Jewish community invested in the hospital via charitable donations over the decades.

That sounds fair, and readers I'm betting that there are many PQ politicians who would take the deal.

After all, it would be a question of raising Quebec's debt from $250 billion to $251 billion, a trifle and worth the money to get rid of the reminder of Anglo domination and the fact that as McGill University is Quebec's best institution of higher learning, so too is the JGH, in relation to the health field.
Just ask Jacques Parizeau and Pauline Marois, who chose to be treated at the JGH, rather than at any of the aforementioned hospitals on the list I've provided above.

PQ Election promises out the window

The two main planks of the PQ election campaign were the cancellation of the Health Tax, imposed on all citizens by Jean Charest's Liberal government and the promise of a balanced budget.
The PQ government admitted this week that it can deliver on neither due to deteriorating economic conditions and reduced revenues.

 It is no surprise to readers of this blog, I told you this would happen a while back.

"No matter how you slice it, Quebec is in big economic trouble, likely heading into a recession and towards a three or four billion budgetary deficit.
Long gone is the PQ election promise of a balanced budget, the realities of Quebec economics dictate that in the present and foreseeable future, it just ain't gonna happen.  Read: Quebec's perfect storm

Well it may even be worse than that;
When Quebec's finance minister presented his forecast for this fiscal year, he made some predictions in regard to revenue and expenditures, predictions which would allow him to balance the budget.
Well, how'd that work out?... not so well.
Marceau's numbers:

Government revenue to increase +5.2%... So far. +0.6%...an increase 88% less than predicted.
Government expenses to increase +1.9%... So far. +4%...an increase 102%  more than predicted.

Revenues from government enterprises including Hydro-Québec, Loto-Québec, the SAQ, etc., have posted diminishing returns on the order of -4,4% while the government anticipated a rise of 3.8%.

And so the government, just four months into the fiscal year  has built up a $2.3 billion deficit.
The way things are going, my prediction of a 3-4 billion dollar debt this year is looking realistic.

By the way, the last five months have been brutal, each posting a deficit and totalling 3 billion dollars in all, erasing some of the gains made at the beginning of the year.

But all this is no matter to Marois, who now maintains that a deficit isn't as bad as cutting expenses.

Marois steals Bank slogan..."Quebec is richer than you think!"

I cannot stop but marvel at the utter and complete bullshit that comes out of our Premier's mouth. Sorry to be crude, but never in my life have I seen a politician so brazenly attempt to lie, misconstrue and totally mislead.
Readers know me as a cynical sort, one who claims to have seen it all in regards to politicians. But Pauline takes the cake for evil manipulation and manifest dishonesty.
Watching a children's movie with my 4 year-old grandson, I'm inspired to nickname Pauline Marois as "Despicable She"
She has evolved to the point that almost nothing coming out of her mouth  can be trusted.
The definition of an inveterate liar is someone who lies, even when it makes more sense to tell the truth.

"Pauline Marois made the case for Quebec sovereignty on Sunday, arguing that Quebecers are richer now that they were in 1995, when they came close to choosing independence.
“Never has Quebec counted so few families without jobs or living on social assistance,” the premier said at the close of a two-day meeting in Montreal of about 500 Parti Québécois delegates and observers from across the province." Link

Is Marois intimating that Quebec's unemployment rate is at a historical low?....Nope, not at all.
Are we really richer because a couple of thousand less people are on welfare?

Marois maybe useless as a Premier, but she certainly could get a get a job selling real estate à la Glengarry Glencross.

Soon she'll be resorting to double negatives to fools us. ..."I want to assure you that no one in my government is not considering tax increases."

Quebec has accrued an additional $100 billion debt since 1995, so the question remains...are we really richer than then?

OQLF..en garde

After being badly embarrassed for over-zealousness a la Pastagate, the OQLF  is being decidedly more cautious.
After a complaint by a language vigilante in regards to a restaurant's signage which included  the word 'take out', the agency declined to proceed, based on the notion that the offence was trifling.

Have a great weekend !pub

Bon  fin de semaine!

FTQ Revelations Entertainment Worthy of a Soap Opera

Michel Arsenault, the president of the most powerful union in Quebec, has decided not to submit his name for re-election, amid swirling controversies and accusations.

It's an interesting story, but hard to follow, mainly because it has been playing out slowly over the months and involves a large cast of characters, the good, the bad and the decidedly ugly.

Now as is my want, I'm going to take the completely opposite view of what is described by the mainstream media, who are vilifying Arsenault and portraying him as some sort of crook.
It just isn't true.

Now I've no axe to grind and no personal stake or friendship here and the FTQ isn't my favourite organization, but fair is fair, Arsenault was railroaded out of a job and although I have no sympathy for him or the union, them's the facts.

Before I start story telling, let's cover some background.

The FTQ (Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec) is Quebec's largest union with over half a million members representing about 44% of Quebec's unionized workers. Its president for the last few years is Michel Arsenault, the subject of this piece.

The FTQ Construction is a component union of the FTQ and had as its president one Jocelyn Dupuis, (until he was ousted) who is one badass connected to the Mafia.

The third element that you need to know about is Ken Pereira, an organizer at the FTQ Construction who turned whistle-blower and got Dupuis dumped.

The last element is the Fonds de Solidarité, a fund created by the FTQ, ostensibly to make investments in Quebec with the express goal of fostering union jobs.
In fact very little of that happens, the bulk of its investments are similar to any other Canadian investment fund, but more on that later on.
The fund receives contributions from the public via RRSP contributions and represents (on the surface) an especially good deal because both the federal and provincial government grant an extra 15% deduction, for a total deduction of 30% more than what is given to a regular RRSP contribution at a bank or trust institution.

Let me take a moment to explain.
A taxpayer making $50,000 and who contributes 5,000 to an RRSP, is only taxed on the remaining $45,000, and so the $5,000 that goes into the RRSP account is tax-free.

A taxpayer making $50,000 and who contributes $5,000 to the Fonds de Solidarite RRSP, gets the same deduction plus an additional deduction of 15% from the federal government and 15% from the Quebec government and so is taxed not on the $45,000 as above, but $43,500. Detailed Explanation

It sounds like a good deal and many Quebecers have invested in the fund because of the additional tax saving with the belief that the money is being invested in Quebec, both assumptions proving false. The Fund has performed so poorly, they'd have been better off investing elsewhere, anywhere else, in fact.

Here is a chart prepared by DAVID over at antagonist.net where you can read more about the subject.(in French.)
The chart describes what $100 invested in the year 2,000 in the various investment funds, is worth today.
The comparison is quite shocking, the $100 invested in the Caisse de dépôt (Quebec's retirement fund) grew to about $165, while the money in the FTQ-Solidarity Fund grew to just $118, while the Ontario Municipal Employee fund grew to $200, the Canadian Pension Plan grew to $210 and the aggressive Teachers fund from Ontario grew to $240.

So to those thinking that the FTQ Solidarity Fund is worth the extra deduction...think again.

And by the way, the federal government pulled the plug on its portion of the tax deduction this year, claiming that the Fund doesn't really invest much in job creation and is really just another player in the RRSP game.

But the Solidarity Fund still has about $9.3 billion in assets and that certainly is no trifle.
The fund is managed by professionals, but the President of the FTQ is automatically placed on the Board of Directors.
And here plays out the drama.

While Jocelyn Dupuis was then FTQ-Construction boss, he partnered up with some serious Mafiosi and tried to get Arsenault to use his influence as a board member of the Solidarity Fund to lend these companies money.
Arsenault demurred, telling Dupuis that the reputations of the partners made it impossible to lend them anything and considering the repercussions of turning down the Mafia, I think he acquitted himself nicely.
No harm no foul, the Fund never gave Dupuis and his partners any money at all.

Ken Pereira  -whistle blower extraordinaire!

At any rate, Dupuis' actions in the union got the hackles up of Ken Pereira and he was determined to kick Dupuis out of the union, He was so determined to get dirt on Dupuis that he secretly broke into the office and stole financial records that showed Dupuis bilking the union by way of phony expense claims, restaurant bills for up to $5,000 a meal and incredibly, claiming the mobster partners as the guests!
Pereira took the proof to Arsenault and asked him to dump Dupuis, but Arsenault stalled, hoping to clean up the mess privately.
After all, he was dealing with a man connected to some very dangerous individuals. In fact one of them is now in jail awaiting his trial for murder.

And so it came to pass that somebody (wink,wink)  leaked the documents to a journalist and when the extent of the bilking became public, Dupuis was forced to resign and was subsequently arrested for theft by the police.
Along the way, we were promised some juicy wiretap evidence at the Charbonneau Commission,  concerning FTQ bosses discussing affairs, but truthfully they were less than impressive, when finally played. The recordings incriminated Dupuis, but not Arsenault.

Jocelyn Dupuis- masterful performance!

By the way, Dupuis just wrapped up testifying before the Charbonneau Commission and his testimony was absolutely delicious.
A consummate actor and raconteur extraordinaire, it was impressive to see what a force he is. Calm and confident, not in the least bit intimidated, he teased with the judge and prosecutor with grinning disdain.
When asked why he associated and partnered up with so many mobsters, he told the commission that he believed in giving criminals a chance to rehabilitate themselves. PRICELESS!!!
Read a story on his testimony

So not a pretty story. But as for Arsenault, I can't really find fault .
He never did anything crooked and his only failing was in not rooting out Dupuis and his mobster friends.
But I'd like to remind readers that these people are extremely violent and volatile and I myself would consider long and large before taking a heroic stand.

Now let's  go on to the second part of the FTQ story, this one is even more interesting.
It concerns Pauline Marois' controversial husband, Claude Blanchet.
Here's what I wrote about him back in 2011. 

Madame & Messier Pauline Marois

Madame Marois has always been an expert political 'operator' cut from the same cloth as Jean Charest. She has survived her own scandals with barely a scratch.
Her detestable husband, Claude Blanchet, is wealthy in his own right. While Marois was a cabinet minister in the PQ government of Jacques Parizeau, her husband was appointed, as director of a new Quebec government investment agency, the Société générale de financement du Québec but was eventually forced out over charges of gross incompetence. During his five year tenure at the helm of the agency, it lost over $800 million, during which time, he and senior management paid themselves generous bonuses, year after losing year!' When he was finally ousted, he negotiated himself an $80,000 pension for life, as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars in severance!
I've been told off the record, by businessmen who know him professionally, that he's the type of guy that you count your fingers after shaking hands with him.

The power couple live in a controversial eight million mansion on Île Bizard, which was the subject of considerable controversy at one point. It was alleged in the Montreal Gazette that the couple paid off someone in order to legitimize a zoning change for the property. Read: How estate was built on public, farm lands.
See breathtaking pictures of the chateau Here
The couple sued the Gazette for $2 million over the article, but when the controversy petered out as expected, they settled out of court with the newspaper. The Gazette in the strangest of settlements, admitted that the story could have caused the couple harm, but was in fact true...Huh?  Link{Fr}
Read the entire post

Would you lend this guy money?
It seems that the Solidarity Fund did just that, $3,00,000 $2,999,999, but more about that sum a little later.

Now for Arsenault the FTQ boss, it would just make business sense to cosy up to the husband of the then opposition leader, a good investment that would pay off, should she become Premier, which of course she did.
The loan was a trifling sum to a 9 billion fund and let's face it, Blanchet and Marois would be indebted whether the investment was successful or not.
Of course it was not.....

Now Marois met with Arsneault twice, once before the loan and once after, ostensibly to discuss public matters and maybe that part is true.

But that is not the point, the meeting cemented a relationship and that is what Arsenault wanted and got.
Who could blame him, it was just good business and there was no ethical lapse on his part at all, no more than offering NHL tickets to a purchasing agent.
To those of you who think that this is unethical, welcome to the real world.
AND during all this, Arsenault was subject to a police investigation which included wiretaps and surveillance!

But it was not Arsenault that broke the ethical bounds, rather Marois, who should never, never have taken such a meeting.
To highlight the power that Arsenault exercised over the PQ, when the crap hit the fan over the mob's attempt to get loans from the Solidarity Fund, the opposition demanded that Arsenault explain himself before a National assembly Committee.
Marois steadfastly refused, protecting Arsenault from testifying, but when Arsenault himself decided that he was better off appearing, the Premier reversed herself.

At any rate, it should never have happened, the Charbonneau Commission was looking into these things and this Parliamentary circus was nothing more than a distraction.

Now back to the loan..
It seems that the full board of Directors of the Solidarity fund is required to approve any loan of three million dollars plus and so that is why the loan to Blanchet's company was $2,999,999, a dollar short of the threshold.
Draw your own conclusion... 

One last thing.
During Dupuis' testimony, it came out that the FTQ-Construction union, the entity that Dupuis led, gave quite a bit of help to  André Boisclair and the PQ in the 2007 election.
Hundreds of FTQ-Construction workers put up signs, manned phone lines and provided security and babysitting services.
Now there's nothing illegal at all about that, as long as nobody was paid to do the work and Dupuis claimed that to be the case.

But what is interesting, is the fact that Dupuis admitted to sharing a few meals with Boisclair to discuss strategy.

Now the LCN news network dug up an old André Boisclair interview where he told the interviewer that the days of the PQ leader being a pal with union leaders is a thing of the past and that he would not be conducting business over liquid lunches, so to speak.

A direct contradiction of the facts.
In Boisclair's upcoming defamation lawsuit against Jacques Duchesneau, and Francis Legault,  I think the defence team should pay notice to the fact that Boisclair was untruthful.

As they say on the TV court room dramas...'goes to credibility, your honour!'

Immigrants-The Real Quebec-Bashing

My 90 year-old mother came to this country almost 65 years ago and still is haunted by the immigrant experience.
She never fails to remind me that immigrants need our compassion, generosity and support, because it is a hard road to go down, as she can attest to.

Were times tough on her and my dad?
Although my mother spoke six languages (including Latin), my father four, neither had any French or English, and so the first few months were particularly difficult, until they learned both  French and English.
Almost penniless when they arrived, they shared a seedy apartment with my aunt and uncle (also immigrants) and when winter rolled around, the two pregnant women had but one pair of winter boots between them, so alternated going out.
The small apartment was dingy and poorly maintained. My mother did the washing at a neighbour's house in return for baby-sitting, a washing machine, a luxury completely out of reach. Meals were sparse and clothing donated. The only entertainment, card games with other greenhorns. My mother told me the story of looking in on my older brother sleeping in the hand-me-down crib, right beside a rat.
Yep....
Of course my father took whatever work he could get, two jobs that paid less than a decent one, with the road to middle class, decades in the making.
Their's is the story of that particular immigrant generation, perhaps an experience similar to your parents or grandparents, be they Italian, Jewish, Greek, Portuguese or East European. In those days, if you didn't work, you didn't eat.

I imagine it's a bit easier today to be an immigrant but still, every time the television airs a news story of another Montreal slum lord and the condition of his apartment building, full of vermin, bedbugs, mould and cockroaches, there is almost always a poor immigrant family staring out from behind the door.
These living conditions shouldn't be tolerated in our society, but for many immigrants, there aren't any alternatives, nobody is putting them up at the Ritz.
I imagine it's still not easy to be an immigrant, especially now with all the wealth around us, unattainable to the newly arrived.

So how should we treat these newcomers?
With respect, compassion, generosity and inclusiveness, or should we do as the PQ instructs us to do....bash them mercilessly.

Coming to a new country is hard, but infinitely harder, when you are treated as a second class citizen and that dear readers, is exactly what the PQ wants us to do, bash the immigrants into submission, reminding them that what and who they are, is unacceptable, constantly hectoring them that their upbringing, their customs, their religion and orthodoxy is unwelcome in Quebec and that they must make themselves over, forgetting the old axiom that You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

There is something perverse about a society that invites foreigners to fill the void of a falling birth rate and then complains that these newly arrived immigrants are too 'foreign.'

Let us make no mistake about it, immigrants are doing us a favour, otherwise we would never allow them in, Quebecers generally loathe immigrants and consider them little more than a necessary evil.

Quebec takes in 50,000 immigrants a year because the province is desperate to fill the void of a falling birthrate.
Without immigration Quebec's population would fall by about 25% each generation. At the present pace of re-productivity, without immigration, Quebec's population would fall from 8 million to 4.5 million people in just fifty years and that doesn't even consider the negative inter-provincial outflow. (the difference between Canadians moving into Quebec, versus Quebecers moving to the ROC.)
Those are some pretty stark numbers, representing a harsh reality.

So it remains a choice between asking Quebec families to have about 1/2 a child more per family or inviting foreigners to make up the difference.
It remains a mystery why no Quebec politician, language militant or separatist, dares bring up the subject.
Probably, because Quebecers would scoff at the idea of making any real effort or sacrifice to save their own culture or language, it's much easier to put the onus on the backs of Anglos, Ethnics and immigrants.

How is it that not even the most militant and stringent separatists like Mario Bealieu or Jean-Paul Perreault, ever bring up the subject of re-productively and the very real solution that would preclude the loathsome immigrants?
It is probably because anyone asking Quebecers to have more children will be laughed out of the room. Quebecers want their culture preserved, but not at any personal sacrifice, that is the simple and irrefutable truth. 
And so it is much easier to bring in foreigners and bash them mercilessly for not acting like locals, with the smug undertone that Quebec is doing them a big favour by allowing them to settle among us.

Most immigrants come to this country for the sake of their children and toil for decades in poverty to give their children the possibility of a better life.
Those that are unemployed of their own volition are a testament to the failure of the selection process and again who is really to blame? The politic of language weighs heavy, with those doing the choosing, making the ability to speak French more important than anything else.

If you went into a bakery and purchased a frosted cake that turned out to taste pretty awful, would you go back and buy the exact same cake week after week, year after year, all the while bitching to the clerk that the cakes the bakery sells are crappy?
At a certain point, is it the bakery's fault for your bad experience, or your own idiotic decision to  return over and over again, expecting a different cake?
Do you really think that if you add some whipped cream or remove the crappy frosting, the cake will be acceptable?
There is an obvious problem here, and if you can't see it, welcome to the politics of Quebec immigration.

Quebec has a love/hate relationship with its immigrants, they love to hate them and the real definition of Quebec-bashing is the treatment of immigrants by Quebec society.

The banning of the Hijab is just the latest element in immigrant-bashing, where in Quebec those who look different, wear different clothes or speak with an accent are systematically discriminated against in the workforce at a level unparalleled in the ROC.
Quebec suffers from the worst assimilation record in Canada vis-a-vis immigrant employment and while unemployment rates for immigrants and native-born is just about the equal across Canada,  in Quebec, immigrants suffer double the unemployment rate of native-born Quebecers.
The discrimination exists across the board and even in government.
The perverse result is that immigrants are more accepted in the English milieu and so seek employment in Montreal where Anglo employers are more tolerant and where there is less workplace discrimination.
It's ironic that French language militants scream blue murder that the immigrants are working in English, at too high a proportion.
Again who is to blame... must be those nasty English for being so welcoming and yes, horrors of horrors... so accommodating.

This is the reality of Quebec immigration, the bubbling latent racism that has finally surfaced  courtesy of the PQ who are encouraging Quebecers to embrace the Dark Side of racism, à la Darth Vader.

Every time I hear a francophone militant or journalist claim that Quebec is a welcoming and tolerant society, I don't know whether to laugh or cry, the notion delusional at best and dangerous at the worst.

I don't like to cherry pick, but a recent story on TVA underscores the reality of attitudes, especially among older Quebecers, who never really had much contact with the outside world or foreigners for that matter.  The story details rampant racism in the CHSLDs, state run senior's homes, where most of the attendants are immigrants and where the residents, who are fossils, heap abuse upon their caregivers for being what they are.

"It hurts, that's for sure," said a forty year employee. A patient even hit and scratched me. "I am told: Don't touch me, I don't want to get dirty," told another clerk, who said that he often had to deal with racist behaviour. Link{fr}

And racism permeates Quebec's public service, where immigrants and minorities are badly under-represented, with defenders of the system claiming sanctimoniously that it is 95% white and francophone, because 'les autres'  don't have the language skills.
Read another story : Racism rocks PSAC
Here's another story of a city employee suing over racism Link{fr}

A couple of years ago, I detailed the story of an Arab who submitted his C/V complete with his Arabic name for a job with a para-government agency and who was refused an interview. When he re-submitted the exact same application using a francophone name, he was immediately contacted.
Of course, he didn't get the job when they got a look at his face in person.
He successfully sued over racism and received a lump sum payment, but no apology.
A judge recently handed down a judgment in favour of a City of Montreal employee who was systematically passed over for promotion because he was Black. Link{fr}
Louise Harel, the long time Vision Montreal leader (who lost her seat in the last election) complained in a policy statement  that the City of Montreal was consistently racist in relation to its hiring and promotion policies. Link{fr}
What is the point I trying to make?
...This is the government, which is supposed to set a good example!

Hundreds, if not thousands of professional immigrants are held back by provincial licensing boards who consistently bar them from entering their fields, choosing to call into question their qualifications, offering few programs to get them up to snuff and accredited.
And so immigrant doctors are forced to drive cabs and engineers must content themselves with menial labour.
Welcome to Quebec, we are open to immigrants.....but.

I cannot imagine what Muslim women who wear the veil out of conviction, must be feeling now.
Betrayal, shame, anger,  fear, humiliation?... I imagine some degree of it all.

Never mind the Jews and the kippah, they are a highly successful, resourceful and mature community. They will cope well, most of the children will leave the province, not because they wear the kippah, but because they are not welcome and have the skills to leave.
This after a 250 year history of contribution and good citizenship.
The Jewish community understands all too well that they are being thrown under the bus, collateral damage in Quebec's attempt to rein in what it considers Muslim extremism and that the banning of the Kippah, a necessary trade-off if the Hijab ban is to appear even-handed.
No matter, young Jews will this leave this province, taking away their McGill and Concordia degrees, paid for by Quebec taxpayers, to contribute as successful tax-paying adults in Toronto, Vancouver, New York, Calgary and Los Angeles.
And those communities will be better for it. 

But the Muslim immigrants don't have as many options because quite frankly, they are generally on the poor side of the economic scale and paradoxically those that the PQ is targeting the most, are the Maghrebiens from North Africa who only speak French.
These women have few options and leaving to parts unknown, an impossibility without English.

The Charter of Hate is a poison that will infect our entire society and as the government signals that the Hijad is unacceptable, common citizens will take up jihad to sanitize our society, even where the law doesn't apply. It is inevitable, something I told you would happen many months ago.

It doesn't take a genius to understand that the law will lead to confrontation and conflict and for Drainville and company to denounce incidents of immigrant-bashing, a hollow and meaningless gesture because they absolutely knew the consequences of enacting hate legislation.

To Muslim women, even those without a Hijab, I suggest carrying around a camera or smart phone and become familiar with how to take videos.
When next accosted by a 65 year-old pur-laine idiot with purple hair and a foul mouth, just press record. These people are cowards and most will run away but the idiots who continue their nasty civics lesson, a video record will serve to show the world how far our society has degenerated. 

To those who are passionate about removing these religious symbols in public, I ask the simple question;
What will all this hullabaloo accomplish?
Will the Muslim women who remove their Hijabs magically transform into different people, poutine and maple syrup loving separatists?  Is that the fantasy?
Or are these immigrants more likely to become embittered and angry.

How will it end...badly.

Quebecers remain naïvely deluded that there will be no consequences over a religious ban, in spite of the fact that they've already had their first taste of push back, a slap in the face by the international soccer community who told the provincial soccer association that if they wished to ban head wear on the pitch, they could play with themselves (and yes, the pun was intended.)

It is the same attitude that tells us that Bill 101 never affected Quebec's prosperity, another delusion impossible to dispel.

I hope the Charter of Hate is passed in the most violent form, it will hasten the judgment day and like an addict, nothing can get better until we hit rock bottom.

Charter of Values - PQ Remains on Script

Quebec Politicians Debate Charter of religious neutrality under the Crucifix in the National Assembly

The PQ finally deposited its Charter of Values in the National Assembly Thursday, having renamed it "Charter Affirming The Values Of Secularism And The Religious Neutrality Of The State, As Well As The Equality Of Men And Women, And The Framing Of Accommodation Requests" a dog's breakfast if I ever heard one.

You can read the entire law below;

Quebec's proposed Charter of Values

As you can read, or as I shall summarize, the PQ presented the bill in its harshest form, applying the law to everyone who remotely works for the government, paid directly or indirectly.

The bill would even apply to those outside workers who work for private companies, but on government projects or property, like plumbers, cleaning staff, construction workers or painters hired to work on a government buildings.

The one area where the law remains vague is on the sanction, nowhere does it say what will happen to a worker who is disobeys the law.

14. After a first failure by a personnel member of a public body to comply with the restriction on wearing a religious symbol, dialogue must be engaged in before any disciplinary measure is taken by the public body, in order to remind the person of their obligations and foster their compliance.

What a cop-out!
The clause clearly underscores the PQ's reluctance to define what will happen to those who disobey the law and who exactly will enforce it.

So are we to expect the creation of the 'OQL,' L'office Quebecois de la Laicité, complete with rat lines where people can squeal on scofflaws and where government inspectors may enter schools and hospitals in an effort to ferret out religious offenders.

At any rate, the PQ pretty much stuck to the script that I described in a blog piece I wrote last week; 
No Election? Don't be so sure... 

And so the PQ is playing the game exactly as I described, coming down hard and waiting to see how the polls react.

The CAQ cannot vote for the Bill as is and will be forced to side with the Liberals in defeating the government, knowing full well that will be decimated in the upcoming election.
But to let the bill pass as is, political suicide as well and would split the party to the point of internal destruction.
It will be a political Game of Chicken and test the nerve of both the PQ and the CAQ.

For the PQ, it is a case of poll-watching.
Should the numbers indicate they can win an election toeing the hard line, then they will remain firm.
But if things don't improve, they can always make enough compromises to satisfy the CAQ and remain in power.

All this will play out into the Spring of next year but I am reminded of the famous words of Bobby Burns

"The best laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft a-gley, [often go awry]"

The continued deterioration of the Quebec economy will catch up to the PQ come budget time and it will be a question of either raising taxes or presenting a several billion dollar deficit.

The real test will be job creation which the PQ is desperately trying to cover by spending billions to create jobs.

If the unemployment rate rises any further, while the rate in Canada plummets, the PQ will never survive to see the Charter of Many Words enacted.

For Francois Legault, it is clearly question of being between a rock and a hard place, leaving him with just one viable option.

Vote with the Liberals to defeat the PQ in exchange for a minor partnership in a coalition government.

My dad used to have a favourite saying;

If you can't get the whole loaf of bread, take what you can get.

For Legault, his dream of becoming Premier is dead and so it is decision time. Members of his own caucus already know the party is a lame duck.

And so the political nonsense over the Charter goes on, distracting the population from the very real economic problems that we are ignoring.

Panem et circenses.

.
.
.


It's the weekend and so let's finish on a humorous note.

My son, his lovely wife and my two grandchildren came in from Brooklyn for the weekend to introduce themselves to the newest member of our family...James, born to my daughter and her husband.

That's not the story....

My son picked up a Remembrance Day Poppy and wore it on his jacket back in the Brooklyn hospital where he works.

A patient asked him what the flower on his lapel represented, because he had seen it on television, on the breast of Mayor Rob Ford of Toronto, who is making news all over the world!

HaHa!!!!

Here's something that I couldn't resist putting together. 

To readers from Toronto or Ontario, don't be offended, as they say in Hollywood, the only bad publicity is no publicity.!!!!!

Crazy Eyes!..Chris Farley & Rob Ford! Separated at Birth?

Have a great weekend!

Bonne fin de semaine!