Meet the Real Pierre-Karl Péladeau

 Early into his entry into the campaign as a PQ candidate Pierre-Karl Péladeau boasted to reporters that if he ran his companies the way the Liberal government ran the province, he would be bankrupt.
It was a cute line, one that had the throng of reporters eating out of his hand, but one that had me shaking my head in disbelief.

Not one reporter challenged PKP on his statement because his company did indeed go bankrupt and it was quite a spectacular bankruptcy at that.

There is a popular misconception in  Quebec and in the ROC that Pierre-Karl Péladeau is a local version of Warren Buffet or Ronald Perelman, a brilliant business visionary who made his fortune on talent, acumen and guile.

...Sorry readers,  I feel incumbent  to pop that balloon.
First things first, Péladeau is no brilliant entrepreneur, he made his money the old fashioned way....he inherited it!

When PKP's father, the irascible Pierre Péladeau died, he left Pierre the keys to a printing and newspaper empire. The Péladeau senior was a man who did indeed build a business empire from scratch and was the very embodiment of the stereotypical rough and tumble shark, a nasty antisemite, who was as hard on his family as he was on himself.

Pierre Péladeau was a miserly bastard and when I think of him, I always remember the television show on Quebec TV that played practical jokes on Quebec personalities.
On this particular episode, a fake tollbooth was set up on the exclusive road that led to his private estate and when Péladeau was stopped and informed that he'd forthwith have to pay a toll every time he came or left his home his reaction was priceless. The renowned cheapskate went absolutely ape shit at the idea and embarrassed himself royally on camera. How the episode ever made it to air is beyond me.

At any rate, the reality was that Quebecor was a failing business, the printing business going the way of the saddle at the turn of the last century or within my memory, telegrams, the typewriter,  the pager or for that matter, film in a camera and one-hour photo-finishing in the mall.....well, you get the picture.
The digital age has not rendered the printer business obsolete, but has drastically shrunk the market, where practically all the big players are closing or re-organizing.

With the handwriting on the wall, PKP got lucky, very, very, lucky.

It just so happens that the Government of Quebec was looking for a white knight, a Francophone White Knight, to save Videotron from being bought by ROGERS, the Ontario-based cable behemoth, seen in Quebec as a foreign entity and dangerous interloper.
Bernard Landry summed up neatly the attitude of the Quebec government at the time;
"Could you imagine how the British would react if Americans made a bid for the BBC?" 

It's happened before, an indignant Quebec government, panicked into an overpriced purchase of a company because of the fear that these enterprises would fall into the  hands of foreigners Anglo Canadian companies.

 Readers with long memories might remember what happened when Loblaws made an offer to purchase the Steinberg food chain back in 1988 for $1.5 billion. The Quebec government, fearful of another Ontario takeover, bought the company  for $1.8 billion  through Soconav, a Quebec company involved in shipping and with no experience in the food business.
Steinberg foundered and was eventually sold off piecemeal, another fine financial disaster.

Fast forward to 2000, where the Quebec government was again frightened by a potential Canadian takeover of another Quebec jewel, Rogers attempted takeover of Videotron, Quebec's largest cable distributor.

Teaming up with Quebecor, the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (Quebec's public retirement fund) purchased Videotron for $3.2 billion, the CDPQ taking back  45% in shares in Quebecor in exchange for the cash.

So single-minded and determined was the CDPQ to save Videotron that they failed to consider just how dim the prospects were for Quebecor and so invested heavily in a failing business.

Fast forward again to 2008 when Quebecor World, the major component of the Quebecor conglomerate went bankrupt, leaving Quebecor hobbled with Videotron now representing its most important asset, accounting for  70% of the companies profits.

It certainly was a precipitous turn of events for PKP, who was rescued by the CDPQ purchase, but not such a good deal for the CDPQ  and taxpayers.

In 2012 the CDPQ sold almost half of its shares in Videotron in frustration over the poor performance of the stock. The  $1.5 billion realized on the sale was almost exactly what it paid twelve years earlier, when one adds in dividend payments made along the way.
In other words they made nothing on the 12 year long investment.

Had the CDPQ put the money into bonds yielding 5%, it would have reaped a $2 billion dollar profit over the twelve years.
Better still, had the CDPQ not bought Quebecor and instead bought shares in ROGERS in 2000, the investment would be worth over six billion dollars today, over three billion more than they earned with the investment with Péladeau! Link{fr}

Still think Péladeau is a genius businessman?.....Well in certain respects he is, for himself, but for Quebec taxpayers, who are out 2-3 billion dollars in their dealings with PKP, its quite another story....

Over the years, Péladeau has proven in one respect to be a chip off the old block, he's got a mean streak a mile wide and is ruthless in his affairs, just like his father.
 Péladeau companies have been involved in twelve lockouts, the most famous involved the Journal de Montreal, in which he broke the back of the union by contracting out news gathering through a loophole in Quebec labour law.

When Pauline Marois announced Péladeau as the Messiah who would propel the PQ over the top, I was one of the few who offered the opinion that it might backfire badly.

"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. Link

 I said that because Quebecers, especially the PQ and leftist bloc have a deep aversion to Péladeau, he is in fact the antithesis of what they believe in. A union-buster and capitalist of the first order, the only thing that he brought to the table was his success in business and it now is clear that the negative far outweighed the positive.

And so Marois has relegated PKP to the back of the room, we've not heard anything of substance from him ever since his fist pump in favour of sovereignty, a move that quite clearly sent the PQ into a downward death spiral.
When he does speak out, its only to mouth vapid PQ platitudes, giving off the distinct appearance of the proverbial Emperor with no clothes, exposed as something a lot less formidable than we expected, a legend debunked.

Mudslinging Leaders' Debate Devoid of Ideas

Watching last night's leader debate had me saddened over how low the political discourse has sunk in this province.
Insults, accusations, finger-pointing and nasty retorts were just about all we took away from the two-hour slugfest.

Afterwards, the journalists on both sides of the political spectrum discussed who won the debate in terms of who more successfully flung mud and whose barbs and insults had more effect.
It reminded me of a hockey fight where the two players square off and throw a few punches, some landing, some not, where in the end teammates applaud the effort and cheer their gladiator regardless of effect.

I don't know if in high school or college you ever had the experience of attending a student debate, but if you did, the level of debate was certainly higher than what we witnessed yesterday and ideas no doubt, the center of attention. No teacher/moderator would ever let debaters speak the way they did to each other last night or wander off into personal insult territory.

Over the last forty years the sovereignty debate has hung over the province like a permanent toothache, an analogy I use because when one has a serious toothache, there's nothing much else that can occupy one's mind.

Whether you are a federalist or a sovereigntist, I think you'll agree that we haven't seen anything that resembles a rationale attempt by the parties to enter into a real discussion with voters about how Quebec can be set right.

Oh, sure, we've been promised money for this, or money for that, a chicken in every pot  by all the parties, a sad attempt to seduce us with our own money.

The promises would be laughable, if not so sad, my favourite being the undertaking by the PQ to make sure every Quebecer had access to a family doctor within two years.

Really?
If that was doable, why hasn't the PQ already found a doctor for, say half of the 25% of doctorless Quebecers in the year and a half they've been in office?

But I'm not singling out the PQ for pie-in-the-sky promises, it's been the policy of the Liberals as well to spend money we don't have, on entitlements we can't afford and this in a lame attempt to buy voters' love.

In our comments section, the overwhelming topic of discussion remains sovereignty and the reality is that so overbearing is the issue that most voters will tolerate any incompetent government as long as it is federalist, while the same goes for sovereigntists, who really have no choice but to vote PQ if they desire a sovereigntist government, or at least a non-federalist government.

As I said, the sovereignty issue is a toothache that drowns out all rational political discussion and sadly remains once again, the dominating issue in this election.
I'm often castigated by those who decry the fact that I bitch and moan a lot, without offering any solutions, so I'm going to now offer an election platform of my own, in a effort to spark some discussion and to underline the utter inanity and vapidness of the election platforms offered by our political parties.

The idea behind these suggestions is to point out that real change requires real change, talking about shifting a few dollars here or there can't or won't affect real change.
Here goes;

No. 1 - No Discussion about sovereignty
Some things in life are better left unsaid.
Talking about a pointless and divisive issue serves no purpose. Maybe in the future, but certainly not now.
Discussions about not having a referendum are as pointless and as painful as discussing about having a referendum.
With the equalization debate about to be re-opened, it is self-destructive at this point to annoy the rest of Canada with idle threats and tantrums.
We've now reached the point that support for Quebec sovereignty has sunk to about 38% percent in Quebec and RISEN to about 38% in Canada, the worst case scenario I can think of, not particularly conducive to good relations.
The sovereignty debate reminds me of a caged hamster running on a treadmill, a lot of effort and distraction expended on nothing.

Come to think of it, the lyrics of the old STEELER WHEEL song, Stuck in the Middle With You pretty much describes our situation perfectly

♪ ♫ ♬  
Well I don't know why I came here tonight,
I got the feeling that something ain't right,
I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair,
And I'm wondering how I'll get down the stairs,
Clowns to the left of me,
Jokers to the right, here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you.   
♪ ♫ ♬

More wordiness? How about this old proverb;
"What the eye doesn't see, the heart doesn't grieve over"   

Now to the Nitty-Gritty.

No. 2 - Reserve public daycare for those who need it
Is this the biggest no-brainer of all?

Who of you out there believes that it's okay for a $150,000 plus lawyer to drive up to deliver her child to a public daycare facility while a barista at Tim Hortons can't find a place for her child.

Before we even discuss whether the program is reasonable or desirable, can't we clean it up to make it accessible to those who need it and restrict access to families which can afford other arrangements?


No. 3 - Free University Education
Students only pay about 12-15% of their university education, so making it free isn't a big deal, only about $700 million.

But making education free would be a wonderful opportunity to create a new social contract in education, one where students have to study and where teachers would have to teach...a novel idea in Quebec.

A revamped education system would more than pay for the free tuition and in fact SAVE the government hundreds of millions of dollars money in the long-term. Quebec tried to be different from the rest of North America, but sometimes, the tried a true is the way to go.

1. Eliminate cegep and add one year to high school and university. The cegep system is a failed experiment that allows unqualified students to be babysat by unqualified teachers.
2. Raise standards, instead of lowering them. The idea that everyone benefits from higher education is absurd. In Quebec, French cegeps are so desperate for students that a high school leaving certificate is no longer required. Just show up and you're in. Of these students 50% drop out in the first year. 
3. Shrink university sizes. Almost all universities and cegeps in Quebec are just plain too big so they try to fill the benches with unqualified students. Dropping the capacity of the universities by 15% would return competition to the system while saving tons of money. Losing the worst 15% of students would be a financial blessing without sacrificing anything. These students aren't going to pass anyways and are just wasting their time and our money.
4. Free tuition is not a free pass. Students would have to qualify by PASSING their courses. A one time charge would be applied in the first year and serve as a deposit for failure. Those who fail classes or drop out would forfeit the money and be required to pony up again if they wished to continue. Sound harsh? The alternative is paying every year. Students benefiting from free tuition could be required to do some community service in their own school or waive that obligation by participating in university extra-curricular activities. The money held in trust could be returned with interest to graduating students who have completed their studies in the allotted time, a pretty nice incentive for success!
5. Eliminate the program whereby Quebec taxpayers pay for a reciprocal transfer program between Quebec and francophone countries where foreign students pay local tuition rates. This program is a one-way street with French students studying in Quebec benefiting 10-1 over  Quebec students abroad. 25% of the students attending the HEC of the University of Montreal are beneficiaries of this program from France. The program was meant to foster relationships between the Francophonie, but some of these foreign students are going to McGill, all on the taxpayer dime, medicare included!  Talk about unintended consequences!
6. Courses like Art Appreciation, History, Political Science and Cinema are now mostly the repository of students unable or unwilling to take actual courses that can lead to an job rather than an avocation. I'm not in favour of eliminating these courses, society needs to be well-rounded, but these courses should be reserved for  ELITE students who deserve the opportunity to study these subjects. Would you as a taxpayer be in favour of offering violin lessons to talentless layabouts or require them to display an aptitude for the instrument.  I'm more than willing to subsidize a student with real talent or determination, someone who is more than likely to use his education to further a career in those esoteric fields.
7. Eliminate 'hobby' education. I had a neighbour who went back to school at 55 to become a sociologist  and never practiced a day after graduating.  The whole thing was an enrichment experience that taxpayers shouldn't be forced to fund. Like hang-gliding or golf, pay for it yourself.
8. Control salaries and expenses, while freezing all new building programs. The idea that a university rector is worth $400,000 plus a padded travel and expense account is laughable. Running a university is nothing as compared to a real executive job in the real world where creating money is the trick, not spending it.

No. 4 - Re-vamp Hydro-Quebec and eliminate political interference

Selling off Hydro-Quebec is just not politically doable, but getting the politicians out of the decision-making process an absolute necessity.
With falling prices internationally, Hydro-Quebec is being squeezed between lower demand and diminishing prices.
The very first act would be to stop any expansion of foolish wind power and co-generation projects, AS WELL as closing down all such projects in operation, which lose money every day, every hour and and every minute.
Undertake negotiations with Newfoundland  to normalize the situation so that the foolish energy programs put forward by Newfoundland can be replaced by over-capacity from Quebec.
Renegotiating the famous 'swindle' can actually be in Quebec's long-term interest.


No. 5 - No More Jobs for the boys

The ongoing disaster that is employment in the regions has confounded government for the last fifty years. The money-losing wind farm industry was created not to produce electricity, but rather to create  jobs in the Gaspé.
Rather than have money-losing jobs-for-the-boys projects that create jobs at two or three times the cost of the salary of the employed, the government can move some of it operations to these depressed regions.
We've all called customer service and been greeted by somebody in Bangladesh or India, so why not in the Îles de la Madeleine?
In fact, of the 700,000 people who work for the government, a transfer of just 5% or 35,000 jobs would cure the problem of unemployment in the regions at no cost.
Any paper-pushing department can be moved and the loss of jobs in Quebec city, not nearly as important as the creation of jobs in the boonies.

No. 6 - Do more with less
Freeze government hiring for five years and let the civil-service attrit naturally through retirement. Governments grow because they can, not because they need to. Every single government department should set a five-year target of reducing its size by 10%.

No. 7 - Encourage bigger families
If Quebecers just had more babies, just about ½ a child per family more, Quebec could completely eliminate immigration.
Poof!, No need for the Charter of Values, because Quebec could freeze it's identity as is and this within just one generation!
The money spent on the costly and under-employed immigrants can be returned to families that have three or more children, via a tax break.
That's right, a three or more children home would benefit from a ten or fifteen percent lower tax break, come income tax time.
Special programs could be created that only three-children plus families could benefit from, like making daycare free for them alone.
A big hurdle is affordable and available housing in the big cities that is needed to accommodate larger families, so builders could be required to set aside a certain percentage of new homes or condos or rental apartments with three bedrooms, available only to families with three children and at a rent comparable to a two-bedroom. The rest of the tenants would make up the difference. That's social justice!


I've got plenty of other ideas, but I'll leave them to another post. In the meantime, what are your ideas and what do you think of these.

Wouldn't you like to see these and other ideas debated, ideas that mean real change.

As Joan Rivers said...'Can we talk?'

PQ's Shocking Campaign Meltdown

As you probably know by now, a new opinion poll by Léger places the Liberals at 40%, compared to the PQs 33% and the CAQ at 15%, putting the Liberals in striking distance of a majority.

But even if the Liberals get a minority government, it's probably just as well, considering that the small group of surviving CAQ members would be in no mood to bring down the government under any circumstances, considering their precarious situation and the fact that the party itself would be decimated and either on the verge of collapse or in dire need of a rebuilding period.

If François Legault loses his seat (which is a distinct possibility) the party might collapse if the Liberals offer a couple of juicy cabinet posts for key survivors, a turn of events which actually would represent a best case scenario.

But the unforeseen meltdown that has befallen the PQ election campaign is another lesson to Quebec politicians that calling premature elections based on polls, which are notoriously fickle, is a risky business to say the least.
I can imagine the PQ ministers contemplating losing their chauffeured limousines and privileged status, ruing the day Pauline called the election at a time where there was no expectation of being defeated in the National Assembly, the CAQ practically begging the PQ for some small compromises to avoid forcing its hand.

Chalk up this election to the over-confident Bernard Drainville, who pushed the party into a hardline and uncompromising position on the Charter of Values, believing that an election could and would be won on the divisive issue, only to see his pet project fade to black during the campaign.
But that miscalculation can actually be forgiven, because at the time, it seemed like a sure bet. The polls were with the PQ  (oh..those polls again..) with support for the Charter in the hinterland, the traditional PQ base, overwhelmingly strong.

Now mistakes by backbench MNAs or novice candidates are to be expected and can be chalked up to inexperience or poor coaching and handling, but the PQ campaign is bleeding from a head wound, with Pauline herself the author of most of the PQ misfortune.
The disastrous turn of events that saw the campaign debate turn from the Charter to referendums and sovereignty can be laid at Pauline's feet and hers alone.

Party strategists are supposed to concoct what they believe is a winning strategy and handlers are supposed to keep their political bosses on point, but it's as if these tried and true political rules don't apply to the PQ and as experienced campaign managers will tell you, there's no more dangerous ground than that covered by politicians who ad lib or think out loud.

Good politicians are disciplined to a fault, seldom deviating from the party line, scripted discourse and canned responses.
The best can even handle reporters, deflecting questions they don't want to answer, or answering a completely different question when convenient.

I imagine that seasoned PQ organizers are shaking their heads in frustration at the utter amateurism displayed by Pauline, she is after all in her umpteenth campaign.

Marois is a feisty and seasoned debater when prepared, as we saw in the leaders' debate where she acquitted herself decently, considering that she was savagely attacked by all three of the other leaders like a pack of dogs.
When prepared and on script, Marois is a force, so it remains puzzling to see Marois so badly off balance.

Some of her mistakes are hers to own, but sometimes happenstance or good or bad luck plays a hand in political fortunes.

Those circumstances are unavoidable and as they say in politics and in life...Shit happens.

Who could have predicted that the arrival of media mogul Pierre-Karl Péladeau could backfire so badly. His arrival was heralded as the second coming, a man whose business success was supposed to give the PQ credibility with regards to experience and acumen in the business world, a glaring weakness in the PQ stable of talent.

So high were expectations and so fearsome was Péladeau, that Macleans magazine was moved to publish a cover with a picture of a confident and stern PKP, asking the rhetorical question as to whether he was the man to break up Canada.

But his ill-conceived fist salute to sovereignty and his opening statement that his entry into politics was based on his goal of bringing the province quickly to independence, was egregiously off-message.

Pauline could have quickly brought things to order, returning the discourse to established talking points, but instead foolishly ruminated on post-sovereignty borders, trade and monetary policy, a discourse that went over like the proverbial lead balloon.  

The renewed discussion of sovereignty and referendums was a subject about as well received by voters as an open discussion on hemorrhoids and so the PQ paid the price almost immediately.

The star candidate, was dead in the water and went from hero to zero faster than any politician I have ever seen.
While the PQ stalwarts overlooked his very real incompatibility with PQ philosophy, they were willing to hold their noses over the expectation that he would take them over the top, to a majority government.
When his ill-conceived sovereignty gambit bit him and the party in the arse, the PQ boo-birds who were holding their tongues were unleashed.

So far did PKP sink that during a press conference, Marois literally shoved him aside, preferring to answer a question herself, rather then letting PKP put another foot in his mouth.

 Pauline shoves PKP out of the Picture!

In that watershed moment PKP went from a dominating force, to a poor shnook that was a liability.
How the billionaire allowed himself to be treated so shabbily is beyond comprehension.

When you're that rich, you can expect that NOBODY PUTS BABY IN THE CORNER.

And so PKP went from a powerful campaign element to a sad fool, from Pierre Powerhouse to Pierre Putz.

But that wasn't all, it seems that other PQ stalwarts also made their best effort to shame the party with gaffes of their own, none worse that the outgoing Justice Minister Bernard St. Arnaud  who got bitch-slapped by the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec (DGEQ) over his public pronouncements that Ontario students were trying to steal the election.

We hadn't seen hide nor hair of the justice minister for well nigh six months, as he desperately avoided the obligation to answer questions over the legality of the Charter of Values., so his inopportune accusation against the students can be compared to the shy wallflower at the prom who overcomes her fear to head out on the dance floor from the shadows, only to make an utter fool of herself.

And so the campaign has shifted sharply in the Liberals favour, a campaign where Couillard has said and done nothing, a surefire recipe for success, or so it seems.
It appears that this election will be won by the party that makes the least mistakes, not the one making the best political case for itself.

To use a hockey analogy, the Liberals, after trailing 2-0 at the end of the first period, have come back to take a 3-2 lead at the end of the second. Starting the third period, the question is whether they can  hang on. It's too early to start ragging the puck, the PQ is going to respond with a ferocious counter-effort, highlighted by a nasty smear campaign and Couillard has to be able to get a lick or two in, of his own.

Today in the Journal de Montreal, another smear story appeared, this one dating back to 1999 which discusses who Jean Charest had lunch and dinner with, intimating that all these meetings were nefarious.
Pure smear. Link{fr}

Yesterday we learned that a couple of months ago, two senior PQ organizers were met by the corruption police and the revelation sparked Pauline to assure us that the investigators just wanted some background information about how political parties finance themselves.
What an utter crock!
We heard the same lame-ass excuse from Michael Applebaum about the visits he received from UPAC (corruption police)  and as the old proverb goes .....Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.

Couillard has announced that he is going to release his and his wife's financials and challenged both Marois and Legault to do the same.
Pauline immediately refused, offering some lame ass excuse, a refusal which can be played for an advantage for a day or two..
With the campaign winding down, deflective issues are important and using another sports analogy, that of boxing, it's time for Couillard to clutch and grab, being ahead on points in the final rounds.

Cowardly Justice Minister St. Arnaud Owes Students an Apology

-

Mr. No-Show, makes appearance to make false accusations

If you didn't know that Bernard St. Arnaud is the outgoing Quebec justice minister in Pauline Marois' PQ government, you should probably be excused, because he's been largely invisible these last six months.

It's patently clear that the reason he's been hiding is his reluctance to defend the legality of the Charter of Values, because quite frankly, he can't and in the best tradition of party politics, if you disagree or can't defend a major policy, it's best to shut up or face the chopping block.

One of the few pronouncements that the minister has made in the Charter debate is to repeat that he nor the government will divulge the legal opinions that it received over the Charter, claiming privilege, much to the political consternation of the opposition who demanded that he make those opinions public or resign. Link[fr}

The timid justice minister has been hemming and hawing over the issue and offered this pearl of wisdom as one of his very few contributions to the debate;

"From the beginning, my answer has always been that I am confident in the legal foundation of the guidance document which was tabled by my colleague [Bernard Drainville] last October. There will be a bill introduced [later in November] and I am confident that eventually, when this bill is passed, it will be lawful and consistent with our constitutional charters. " Link {fr} trans.

In other words, the draft Bill presented by Bernard Drainville would have to be modified in order to stand the test of a legal challenge.
Quite a masterful stroke of deflection!

So it was quite surprising that the usually timid and reserved Justice Minister exploded in an unequivocal rage over the alleged voter fraud of Anglo students in Montreal.

"The Quebec election should not be stolen by people of Ontario, people from the rest of Canada!" the outgoing Minister of Justice , Bertrand St-Arnaud, said, not pulling any punches." Link{fr}trans.

Denis Dion, Quebec's neutral election boss, stands up for democracy

Them's fighting words from a man who is supposed to uphold the principle that people are assumed innocent until proven guilty and perhaps is explained by the visceral and widely-accepted notion that Anglos stole the referendum, through voter fraud.

This popular myth in referendum lore has been concocted by separatists unable to come to terms with the close referendum loss and although irregularities were found, just like this time, as described by the DGEQ, the irregularities fell within the norms and were statistically insignificant.

Just to deflate any argument in the comments section, a few dozen students did vote illegally in the 1995 referendum, but the number pales compared to the 12,000 'NO' votes rejected by separatist scrutineers over invented or minor flaws.
The other argument that new citizenship swearing in ceremonies were rushed to accommodate the desire of these immigrants to vote in the referendum may have been political, but entirely legal, all those who were supposedly fast-tracked were qualified Canadians. At any rate, the number of these voters doesn't come close to the forty-five thousand votes, by which the 'YES' side fell short.

As for the money spent 'illegally' by the NO side, the referendum law that limited these type of expenses was deemed overly restrictive by the courts. The idea that a provincial government can enact a law that forbids the federal government from communicating with citizens, presumptuous and ultra vires.
In fact it can be argued that the restrictions in the referendum law were designed to give the separatist side an unfair advantage, by illegally curbing expenses and placing an artificial ceiling on spending, full well in knowledge that the law would be discredited after the referendum, after the unfair advantage had been exploited.

But I digress.....

PQ Election strategy..Panic and Improv...

Now an outraged St, Arnaund demanded that the DGE verify the bone fides of these students and make daily reports to him as to the status and number of these requests by Anglo students, a request flatly rejected by the independent elections boss, who I must commend for acting in a scrupulously impartial and informed manner.

The calm and measured response of the DGE, Denis Dion took the winds out of the sails of the enraged Pequists, telling them that there wasn't any rush of students trying to get onto the election roles and that the unclear criteria used to judge the voter's primary domicile needed to be clarified for the sake of potential voters and those election officials doing the verification.

In other words, no fraud was detected and the numbers of those trying to get on the election roles were no different than in the last election.

Intimating that these students were 'thieves' for trying to vote is the height of misconduct by a justice minister, who even in the heat of an election campaign must defend the principles of our democracy above partisan politics.

As I pointed out in Sunday's column the notion of 'domicile' is what is at the heart of the issue here and the election law bases the notion of the domicile by what is described in Quebec's Civil Code.

That interpretation is open to interpretation and election officials and potential voters haven't been given clear guidelines until now.
The DGE has revamped those guidelines and has published them on its website.

The notion of domicile

Section 1 of the Election Act stipulates that, to be a qualified elector, a person must have attained 18 years of age, be a Canadian citizen and have been domiciled in Québec for six months. However, the notion of domicile can be complex, and questions may be raised as to its interpretation.
Evidence of domicile is first and foremost a question of law, and is demonstrated by intention. Intention is evidenced by material facts, i.e. a person’s actions and behaviours. The domicile is therefore the place with which a person’s important actions or “states” of civic life are associated. In other words, the domicile is the place a person considers to be his or her principal establishment, gives as a reference for the exercise of his or her civil rights, and indicates publicly as being his or her domicile.
The board of revisors has the power to inquire and obtain any information it considers relevant for examination of an application for entry on the list. To do this, it may ask the person to provide additional evidence, including evidence of bank accounts in a Québec banking institution, a Québec health insurance card, a Québec driver’s licence or registration certificate, or an income tax return made in Québec. The board of revisors may also question an elector who makes an application for entry on the list or for a change of domicile.
The more evidence that is provided, the clearer the person’s intention to establish domicile becomes. It is important to note that some specific actions also provide more certain evidence of the person’s intention to establish domicile in Québec than the simple fact of signing a lease. Examples include the fact of paying income tax in Québec or obtaining a Québec driver’s licence.  Link

 The above clarification does fair justice and the DGE must be commended for its efforts in the face of divergent opinions and political pressures.

Students who actually live here in Quebec full-time deserve a right to vote, others who have never even obtained a medicare card don't, regardless of the length of stay.

That said, one student, Sean Beatty, who fervently believes that he fulfills the criteria, recorded a conversation where the election official denied him registration based on a faulty interpretation of the guiding principle concerning 'domicile.'

Listen at 1:56, when the election officer wrongly claims that the definition of 'domicile' as made in Quebec's Civil Code doesn't apply, an egregious error and 100% wrong.






Now the officer can be forgiven, nothing was particularly clear, but it's interesting to observe that these students knew more about the law then election officials.
That is why many of the rejected are not giving up, heeding the DGE's advice to return to the elections office with the new guidelines in hand.

The DGE has recognized the confusion and moved swiftly and decisively to clarify the rules for everyone.
But the idea that those who were trying to register were 'thieves' trying to 'steal' the election, as the justice minister has stated is an unpardonable sin, undignified and slanderous.

It is time for the Justice Minister to apologize to the students or failing that, crawl back into the hole where he is so used to hiding.

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.