Voter Suppression and Fear Mongering Latest PQ Strategy

One of the first acts of Pauline Marois' new PQ government was to change the election law, allowing students to be registered and vote within their university or cegep.
The thinking being of course, that students who have a historically low turnout would be encouraged to vote in higher numbers and do so largely for the PQ, as the very young are apt to do.

But as Bobby Burns told us, so long ago; The best laid schemes of mice and men....

It seems that students at Montreal's McGill University and Concordia  are availing themselves of the privilege and that has incited the PQ  and their semi-official party newspaper, the Journal de Montreal to launch a virulent attack on Anglo students, meant more to stir up resentment among francophone voters than address any illegality.

The newspaper has launched a virulent smear campaign, intimating that those who are registering to vote are doing so illegally, all without a shred of evidence.

The story was sparked by a returning officer who resigned rather than register these 'foreigners' based on what he claimed was the inability of officials to verify the students' bone fides.

The urban myth of thousands and thousands of such 'Anglo illegals' who voted in the 1995 referendum is a legend that separatists love to invoke, in their belief that the 1995 referendum was stolen by dirty tricks and English money.
The Journal de Montreal has written no less than five articles about these anglo student voters, stoking a controversy that has reached the highest levels of the PQ where the wedge issue is judged useful, whether true or not.

Worst of all, The JdeMtl is proposing the wild and inaccurate assertion that even if the students fulfill all the criteria, they must intend on living in Quebec long-term to be eligible to vote.

It would interesting to know whether the reporter Caroline Pailliez made up this particular condition or was told the same by some election officer, which actually would be more dangerous.

I've taken a screen cap of the statement made by the reporter that  a voter must "have the intention to reside in Quebec long-term"

The same assertion is repeated in another Journal de Montreal story HERE

The Huffington Post picked up the story and repeated the same nonsense;

"Quebec's chief electoral office is trying to clarify the rules for voter eligibility after a number of English-speaking university students from elsewhere in Canada complained they were unable to register for the April 7 provincial election.
Denis Dion, a spokesman for the electoral office, said there are certain cases that are more difficult to assess and the key point is to determine whether a person is committed to living in Quebec."  Link

But the law is exceeding clear. This from the website of the Director General of Elections

 Here is the clause denoting who can vote directly from the Quebec Elections Act

CHAPTER I
QUALIFIED ELECTORS

1. Every person who
(1) has attained 18 years of age
(2) is a Canadian citizen,
(3) has been domiciled in Québec for six months,
(4) is not under curatorship, and
(5) is not deprived of election rights pursuant to this Act, the Referendum Act (chapter C-64.1), the Act respecting elections and referendums in municipalities (chapter E-2.2) or the Act respecting school elections (chapter E-2.3),
The domicile of a person is the domicile established under the Civil Code.

So the question of what is a person's domicile, is interpreted by the Quebec Civil Code

CHAPTER II
DOMICILE AND RESIDENCE

75. The domicile of a person, for the exercise of his civil rights, is at the place of his principal establishment.

76. Change of domicile is effected by actual residence in another place coupled with the intention of the person to make it the seat of his principal establishment.

The proof of such intention results from the declarations of the person and from the circumstances of the case.

Nowhere does it say that the person must commit to living in this domicile in the future or for any determined length of time, just that it actually represents his or her principle residence.
 
Determining whether a voter's domicile is principle is reasonable when voters have more than one home.
This is the case with voters who have country chalets, but must vote in the riding of their city home because it is their principle residence.

"To establish “domicile,” The chief electoral officer, Jacques Drouin explained that a potential voter must not only provide proof that they have resided here for at least six months, but may also be asked to prove that Quebec is the place they consider to be their “principal establishment.” That could mean handing over evidence of bank accounts in a Quebec banking institution, a Quebec health insurance card, a Quebec driver’s licence, or an income tax return filed in Quebec, Drouin said.  " Link

But for students who came from other provinces, who live in Quebec full-time and have a Quebec residence as their principle address, the issue of whether they intend to live here in the future is nobody's business, certainly not a criterion for eligibility.

At any rate, the whole story is journalistic trash and utterly dishonest, a push piece masquerading as news from its opening line.

"Ontario students are trying to vote en mass in the next general  election  in order to avoid a referendum on sovereignty".
(Des étudiants ontariens essaient de voter en masse pour les prochaines élections générales au Québec afin d’éviter un référendum sur la souveraineté.)

As for the impact of these potential voters, let's look a little closer at the five ridings that are supposedly affected as mentioned in another Journal de Montreal article.

Daniel Breton, the PQ incumbent of  Sainte-Marie–Saint-Jacques told a journalist that he is worried about the possible voter fraud in his riding.
But here are the facts.
Mr Breton won his riding over the Quebec Solidaire candidate with the Liberals trailing badly in third.

Even more laughable is including the riding of Westmount-Saint-Louis as a possible target of voter fraud.
The Anglo bastion is one of the safest ridings in Quebec with Jacques Chagnon of the Liberals getting over 15,000 votes compared to the PQ's 1,700.
The PQ is traditionally represented by a 'poteau' as sacrificial candidates are known in Quebec. This election's version is particularly interesting, a member of the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste, probably the only idiot who showed up for the job. I wouldn't go door-to-door, if I was him!

As for Saint-Henri-Saint-Anne, a look at the map indicates that there can't be more than a handful of anglo students residing there, it's too far from the schools.

Saint-François in the Eastern Townships is indeed a closely fought riding but has a minuscule Anglo student population, with Bishops University enrolment of 2,200, just about the only place one would find out-of-province students. The only other Anglo school of significance is Champlain College with it's paltry enrolment of 1,200 students, almost all of whom are locals, anyway.
As for the riding of Sherbrooke, I can't even imagine more than a handful of English out-of town students attending the local French-only universities.

Clearly the smear campaign launched by the Journal de Montreal is meant to strike an emotional response hoping to get more francophones to vote, firing them up with tales of Anglo hordes illegally voting and thus stealing the election, as popular an urban myth as exists in Quebec.

Look for the biased Journal de Montreal to offer us more of these wonderful stories in the run up to the election campaign and the more desperate the PQ gets, the wilder the stories, although I am hard-pressed to imagine a more blatant and biased story than this piece of garbage, masquerading as journalism.

Late Breaking.....

After much pressure the Directeur général des élections du Québec (DGE) has verified and concluded that the reported irregularities do not exist.

In an interview with French CBC;

"This is not what the numbers show," says Jacques Drouin in an interview with Radio-Canada. Only the riding of Saint-Henri-Sainte-Anne in Montreal, received a little more applications in 2012, he said, but nothing to worry about.  Link

This in response to the outgoing Justice Minister's demand that he be given daily reports on the situation, a demand flatly rejected by the DG.

It seems Bertrand St-Arnaud, the outgoing justice minister has finally woken up and come out of his self-imposed vow of silence, caused no doubt by his fear of being questioned on the legality of the Charter of Rights, something he knows, he cannot defend.

How will the media react to the fact that this whole story was fabricated?
...wait and see.

French versus English Volume 105

Election debate uninspired

There's going to be a lot of commentary in the media over Thursday's debate that readers who are interested can peruse at their leisure in other media.
The only point I take away from the debate is that Philippe Couillard didn't get embarrassed over corruption, the Achilles' Heel of the Liberal party for the last three years. As I told you, the PQ advantage was negated with the Claude Blanchet 'deal or no deal' affair and as I predicted, Marois was frightened off the issue by an ominous warning by Couillard in the days running up to the debate.

As for winners or losers, I suggest that beauty is distinctly in the eye of the beholder and that it depends majoritarily on your political bent.
Speaking to this view, Le Journal de Montreal polled six of its opinion writers for their take on who won and who lost and it pretty much broke down on political affiliation.

Mathieu Bock-Côté- "Marois Surprising"

Winner- Pauline Marois

Loser - Phillippe Couillard       

Lise Ravary- "What Debate?"

Winner- Philippe Couillard

Loser - Pauline Marois      

  

Benoît Aubin - "Inconclusive"

Winner- Francois Legault

Loser - Tie

Jean Dussault - "Pfff!"

Winner- Francois Legault

Loser - Tie

Esther Bégin - "Respectful, but no K.O"

Winner- Philippe Couillard

Loser - Francois Legault

Simon Tremblay-Pépin  - "Missed the mark"

Winner- Nobody

Loser - Francois Legault  

As I said...depends on your optic... Link: Journal de Montreal  

The always hilarious YGRECK, the political cartoonist offered us this pearl, an indecisive Pauline Marois, unable to complete the simple Wheel of Fortune puzzle.
His cartoons are always good for a laugh and most of the time, no French required. Go ahead and visit,  YGRECK

"Hmm!.... I can't really see it."

Natives Tell Separatists that they're not interested in an independent Quebec

One of the great myths spouted by separatists is how well they get on with natives and how well they'd be treated in an independent Quebec, filled with brotherhood and good will towards all men.

Not so fast.
Natives are deeply mistrustful of Quebec and have no use for independence. Although separatists have promised to respect treaty rights granted under the British crown and the Canadian government, some tribes are outright hostile especially to the French language.

Natives, like everyone else in Quebec, are divided into linguistic groups, some tribes speak English and are aligned with the English community and others likewise with the French majority.
Quebec is actually home to less than 10% of natives in Canada, about 140,000, of which, 30% are Metis, the ancestors of Francophone Quebecer and Native intermarriage.
But for the Cree and the Innu who live in the North and the high North, as well as the Mohawks down south, English is the language of choice for interaction with Quebec and Canada.

You might recall the terrible conflict that was the Oka Crisis that laid bare the reality of anti-native sentiment in Quebec, with many separatist commentators and journalists pumping up the racism, based mostly on what they perceived as the unholy and insulting alliance of the natives with the English minority and their clear preference to Canada, not Quebec.

Much to the dismay of separatists, but no surprise to any one who pays attention is the Mohawks recent assertion that they'll have no part in an independent Quebec.

Quebec Mohawks likely to declare own independence if PQ wins sovereignty referendum: Grand Chief'

Leaders from Mohawk communities near Montreal say they will likely declare their own independence if a re-elected Parti Québécois succeeds in winning a third sovereignty referendum.
“We’d never be part of Quebec or cede out of Canada because we don’t believe we are Canadians to begin with. Our ties are to the land,” said Grand Chief Michael Delisle of Kahnawake, which counts about 8,000 Mohawks. “I would take a wild guess and I’m sure I’d be right my community would absolutely turn down any sovereignty movement by the provincial government.” Link

“With the potential threat of this region’s culture and language becoming distinctly French, we must concern ourselves with the reality that there is not even 1 percent of the Akwesasne population that speaks the French language. The every day languages are still Mohawk and English. An additional concern we’d have is that much of our vast territory in Quebec would be subject to new, more stringent laws that are alien to our culture. Many areas of our organization and the services we provide would also be impacted by the formation of a new Quebec government.” the release added.

“If Quebec ultimately chooses to separate, I would advise our Council and community to hold our own vote in order to determine whether we would stay within the  borders of Quebec or separate ourselves,” said MCA Grand Chief Mike Kanentakeron Mitchell.  Watertown Daily Time (USA)

Now Quebec could probably live with losing the small reservations down south but the real problem is the Cree up north who make claim to vast areas of the province and the Cree are every bit as militant as the Mohawk when it comes to defending their territory.

It's really another obstacle to independence that Quebec would have to surmount and it isn't at all clear or likely that in light of the current bad blood and the memories of Oka, that any deal could be reached.

Journal de Montreal ramping up Charter Hysteria

When Pierre-Karl Péladeau announced his entry into politics under the PQ banner without selling off his media holding, journalists at the Journal de Montreal were indignant at the accusation that the newspaper would be even more biased than before in favour of sovereignty.

But let's face it, if you were the highly paid editor of the newspaper and a journalist came to you with a story confirming that PKP  participated in drug-laced orgies with Mafia cohorts using underage hookers, would you print or kill the story? (NONE OF THAT  IS TRUE!!!!)

There's the famous journalist adage to remember, that 'A scoop is a scoop, but a job is a job...'

And so I've been watching the JdeMtl closely to see when and if they would run some gratuitous article dishonestly pushing the PQ agenda, and lo and behold my fears were well-founded.

An absolutely despicable article entitled "More Requests for Accommodations' tells readers that requests for accommodations are rising, without a shred of evidence or backup material.

The article quotes some school official, clearly a huge booster of the Charter, describe how students are refusing to take gym or swimming because of religious convictions. All this without one statistic or even an anecdotal tale.

Danielle Boucher, head of an association of school personnel has reported that in a poll, 60% of school personnel in the Quebec city area favour the Charter.
Let's break that down.
60% of Francophone teaching personnel in Quebec City, WHERE YOU CAN COUNT THE MUSLIMS WEARING HIJABS IN SCHOOLS ON YOUR FINGERS are concerned with the growing problem of accommodations.

The story is pure propaganda and even the picture accompanying the story is strange, showing a student who is not even wearing a Hijab eating at what I suppose is a school buffet (maybe not) with what looks to be a portion of rolled ham on the plate.
What exactly is all that about?

Now true to the hilarious Journal de Montreal comments section, one reader took the newspaper to task.

Translation: 
"Interesting. Lagging behind in the polls, the PQ suddenly returns with an attack with its racist and xenophobic Charter. And what do we see five days later in the JdMtl? an article on religious accommodations as well as the energetic pleadings in favour of this Charter (the cost of which is not booked by the PQ) 
After this, Mathieu Turbide has the audacity to write a blog in which he explains that the JdeMtl isn't biased. Really...."

Polls depressing PQ supporters

I've always warned readers that polls in Quebec can change overnight and they seem to have done so again, perhaps not overnight, but dramatically in favour of the Liberals over the course of  this election.
Jack Layton proved in his last election that you can literally move the numbers by 10% overnight after his appearance on an iconic Quebec talk-show.
And so the Liberals, for the moment seem to have snatched the lead away from the PQ rather significantly and aside from being pleasantly surprised, I can't stop those certain feelings of schadenfreude that are welling up inside of me, over the pain these numbers inflict on the PQ brain trust.

"The Forum Research poll for the Toronto Star, which was conducted Wednesday, is in line with a string of surveys this week showing that the federalist Liberals are pulling out ahead of the incumbent Parti Québécois after a rocky campaign launch that was dominated by unpopular talk of a third referendum on Quebec independence.

Of the 1,650 respondents, 45 per cent said they intended to vote for the provincial Liberals compared to just 32 per cent for Pauline Marois’ PQ.

The Coalition Avenir Québec was in a distant third place with 13 per cent of the potential voters and the left-wing sovereigntist part Québec Solidaire garnered 7 per cent support. The results are considered accurate to within three percentage points, 19 times out of 20." Link

Polls like this are significant, because they tend to fire up or throw cold water on the volunteers that are so important in campaigns.
Voters who see these numbers tend to get energized to get up and vote, or conversely skip the whole thing as a lost cause.
These polls can be devastating to the faithful and no better example of this is Richard Martineau, the JdeMtl blogger who has been the Charter of Values biggest booster, writing dozens of pieces in favour, some rather stinging.

After a strange  piece in which he compared the PQ's sovereignty option to Barbra Streisand's nose, (ugly but beautiful) he lost it after the above poll came out, clearly descending into a nasty funk.

In two pieces, where his depression was clearly dripping through the screen, he compared the PQ to a restaurant called La Moulerie (Mussels) in Montreal which suffered a disastrous drop in business because of an outbreak of illness in Montreal due to some bad mussels.
The restaurant serves all sorts of wonderful dishes, he remarked, but alas, because of the toxicity of the mussels, nobody would come to the restaurant.
Actually, quite a good analogy pertaining to the PQ albatross that sovereignty and the referendum represents, both of which hang over the PQ campaign like the Angel of Death.

On his Facebook page, the ardent Charterist (a word?) realized that his dream of checking the influence of the mongol hordes of Muslim, Jews and Sikhs was perhaps going down the drain, and clearly, it was too much too take.

I've come to the conclusion that the PQ does not care about the Charter ...

If the Charter was close to the PQ heart and so important for Quebec, the party of Pauline Marois could have reached an agreement with the CAQ, which offered a very respectable compromise ... It would have maintained about 85% of the Charter.

Instead, we may have 0% of the Charter. Transforming the Charter into an election issue and in trying to use the Charter as an advantage, the PQ rolled the dice. It was 100% of the Charter with them, or NOTHING at all ...

They chose the party before country. Bravo. It will be remembered.

Admit it, dear friends, a little schadenfreude is a tasty delight!

Professors Support Annual Thugfest

Each year, masked anarchists gather in Montreal to demonstrate against police brutality and do so by marching chaotically and destroying property along an undetermined route, splitting up into rowdy marauders and engaging in mayhem leading to pitched and running battles with police.

In the end the police are forced to chase down the rioters, but not before significant property damage, where windows are smashed and cars vandalized.
It seems that the whole point of the affair is for the rioters to get arrested and whine about the unfairness of it all.

For years citizens have begged the police to put an end to the riot before it starts and this year, armed with a bylaw that forbids demonstrations of an indeterminate route, the police stepped in, warned the rioters to disperse and arresting most of them before they could get their licks in.

It was to say the least, frustrating for the anarchists, especially since their protestations fell on the deaf ears of relieved property owners.

But for professors, mostly from that font of higher learning, UQAM, it was unacceptable to arrest the demonstrators before they rioted. So shocking and unfair, it moved 120 teachers  to sign an open letter asking for the resignation of Montreal's police director.
You can see the letter here, but I want to share a sampling of the subjects that these professors teach;

  3 Sexologists..... 
11 Sociologists
11 Literary studies
11 Political Science
13 Social Studies
11 Philosophy
 2 Arts and Letters
 4 Education
 3 Cinema
 2 Art
 3 History
 2 Feminist studies
 4 Language  teachers

and my favourites;
-Interdisciplinary studies for conjugal violence and sexual aggression
-psychoeducation,

When bashers bash...

It seems that language fanatics continue to  amuse themselves with a  hilartious campaign against so-called Quebec-bashing by the English media led by the indomitable Mario Beaulieu, whose two month long campaign has garnered an amazing 4300 signatures on a petition which I suppose he might submit to someone or somebody, sometime.

So in order to help out a lagging campaign I submit this, another  example of those bastard Anglos disrespecting the innocent.

Let's finish with some laughs...

You guessed it...not in Montreal!

 So which might it be?

 

 ....and completely off the subject 

 

Have a great Weekend!

Bonne fin de Semaine!

What to Expect in Tonight's Leaders Debate

I'm not sure as to the importance or the effect that the debate between the leaders tonight will bear upon the election campaign, there are no pollsters who do a before and after poll, that is a poll the day before, followed by another the day after.

I'm sure one of the pollsters will conduct a quickie poll to ask voters who they thought did the best in the debate, but again, gauging the real effect is almost impossible.

One has to consider the fact that those who watch the debate are politically inclined, most tune-in to see how their preferred candidate performs.
At any rate, there's a Canadiens hockey game on TV tonight and the start of the NCAA March Madness basketball tournament, so right off the bat, over a million Quebec sports fans will choose not to watch the debate.
One really has to ask about the wisdom of scheduling such a debate on such a packed sports night. It's not as if the schedule wasn't known beforehand.
Aside from that, the popular On connaît la chanson show (a Don’t Forget the Lyrics knockoff) usually pulls in about a million viewers, so it's hard to predict just how many will be watching the leaders.

At any rate, here's my suggestions as to what each leader should look to achieve, their talking points and their lines of attack and defence.

PAULINE MAROIS
After a shocking poll that put the PQ 5% behind the Liberals, Pauline Marois finds herself for the first time in a very long time, obliged to play catch-up.

She tried to turn the election debate away from the toxic issue of referendums by attacking Philippe Couillard's ethics yesterday which turned into a fiasco as Couillard came out swinging with an ominous warning that he would bring up the issue of the infamous 'deal' that her husband, Claude Blanchet allegedly entered into with the FTQ, to influence the PQ's position on the calling of an embarrassing inquiry into the construction industry.
It was a masterful counter-punch by Couillard, one that thoroughly shocked and frightened Marois, so much so that another PQ stalwart accused him of bullying the Premier.
That actually made things worse, the idea that a Premier could be bullied so easily, not a great reputation builder.
For Pauline, it would be suicide to enter into an ethics debate, so look for Pauline to heed the Liberal leader's warning.

 For Pauline it's important to stress that a PQ government will protect Quebec values and the Quebec model, the old standby of the equality of the sexes, support for unions and the protection of the French language and culture.
She needs to tell the big whopper that the PQ is interested in and capable of creating jobs and balancing the budget.
She should actually avoid attacks on other parties and leaders, and take the high road as much as possible.
As for the issue of referendums, which will come up no matter what, she's got to assure voters that a referendum can only be considered when the economy is improved and the budget balanced and the debt under control. (In other words......never.)

PHILLIPPE COUILLARD
The Liberal leader needs to consolidate his position as a legitimate alternative to the PQ and should avoid harsh personal attacks on Marois, something that would be unseemly in the eyes of the voters.
Despite modern conventions of equality between the sexes, nobody likes to see a man harsh up or denigrate a woman in public. Yup..there I said it.
For Couillard it's important to defuse the Charter of Values debate by assuring voters that the Liberals have a kinder and gentler version which they will proffer, a compromise which tackles the issue with compassion, one where nobody will lose their job and where religion and heritage will be respected. He should underline that under a Liberal government, the heritage of Quebec society will be respected and protected and that specifically, the crucifix in the National Assembly will be maintained.
This differs from the PQ policy of putting the issue of the crucifix to a free vote, something most voters don't want.

If I was his handler, I would tell him to assure voters that the Cross on Mount Royal and the Christian place names that makeup over 10% of streets, hospitals and schools will be protected under a new  patrimony bill, created by the Liberals specifically to protect those Christian traditional values that Quebecers see as a vital component of their makeup.
This position will be something that the voters will eat up and can help take the wind out of the sails of the PQ, which up to now has had a monopoly on the issue.

 Like Marois, Couillard should ignore attacks and stake out his position calmly and confidently, displaying a serene and honourable demeanour, something Quebecers admire and appreciate.

FRANÇOIS LEGAULT
Certainly Legault is in the worst position, stuck in the middle with no clear policy or agenda that separates him and his party from the others.
For him, it's a case of trying to save the bacon and hold off an election wipeout. I'm not sure he can do it at all, certainly not in a debate.
Perhaps the best line of attack is to ask voters not to give either the Liberals or the PQ a majority government, because should one or the other win a majority, it would mean a radical federalist or sovereigntist agenda being rammed down Quebecers throats, something that they don't want and isn't in the province's best interest.
Being ambiguous may actually be exactly what most Quebecers really want, even if they don't know it.
Legault's task is to legitimize that idea and champion the cause.
A middle position, in this respect can be portrayed as balanced and nuanced, one that can serve all Quebecers.
So stressing the theme that giving Couillard or Marois free rein for four or five years in a majority government is dangerous can actually be a successful strategy.

It's a long shot, but it's his only hope.

FRANÇOISE DAVID
Last debate, it was Françoise David that actually earned the most plaudits from viewers with her serene and impassioned defence of social issues.
All she needs to do is a carbon copy performance, inviting voters to express their social conscious and solidarity for the poor and underprivileged.
Selling pie in the sky can be effective with voters if they can be made to feel that their vote is an important message to the ruling class.
Calm, serene and ladylike are the watchwords. David has an exceptional speaking style, confidence oozes and her very deliberate and SLOW speech actually quite riveting.
She will no doubt be the most sympathetic of all the leaders and her goal is to convince just a few more to take the leap and vote for Shangrila, a pipe dream, but a dream just the same.

There it is, my view of the debate. How will it play out and how it will affect the actual vote remains to be seen.
I'll be back on late Friday or early Saturday with my take on the debate,

Marois' Hubby Makes Ethics Debate Toxic for PQ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Too bad.....

Péladeau Proves Money Can't Buy You Love

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key to success: Keep up the referendum pressure

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

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

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

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

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

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

It would be nice if Ottawa helped.