KoZed Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I think you don't understand what the BQ is doing. Without the BQ, Ottawa would never had reconize the Québec as a nation, the Québec would not be allowed to have a place at UNESCO. the BQ is very usefull for the province in Ottawa ant that's why Gilles Duceppe isn't the leader of the PQ. That's bull... the BQ had nothing to do with all that. It was the need for Harper to solidify his voting base in Quebec that made him do both. The BQ's only use is to "park" your votes if you dont want to vote PC, PLC or at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 That's bull... the BQ had nothing to do with all that. It was the need for Harper to solidify his voting base in Quebec that made him do both. The BQ's only use is to "park" your votes if you dont want to vote PC, PLC or at all. You really have to study Quebec history and politic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 KoZed: I agree with the overall theme of a reduced bureaucracy, no question there. Would i be in favor of reducing the school boards' budget and personnel? Absolutely. Besides, it's clear there's a severe mismanagement going on with their budget (when high-level employees permit themselves extravagant trips, suppers in fine restaurants and other lavish expenditures, you know something's wrong...) ...but to cut the entire thing seems outrageous. Why must everything be "all or nothing" in this province? Go for a 25% cut immediately, and consider another 25% cut over the next 5 years. Come back in 5 years and see what the situation looks like. With things like this, we need to proceed gradually and cautiously, not impulsively the way Dumont is suggesting. Anyway. If you wish to debate this further, i'm all fired up The problem with reduce funding is reduce effectiveness, yet the operative costs will remain about the same. You end up still paying for something that, in the end, gives you even less results. Those types of public structures are like crutches; and something deep in the average Quebec citizen's psyche makes us afraid of standing without those crutches. Those organizations are not critical. But the collective debts Quebec is leaving to its youth is critical. With the aging population, if we don't cut the deadwood now to alleviate the fiscal burden of the middle class and young families, in a few years its much worse cuts that'll need to be done, and there will be no way to chose or prepare. Either way; right now the way it seems to be shaping up right now is a minority government with the ADQ holding the balance of the power. So you won't get those drastic cuts, but the ADQ will probably force whoever is in power to weed out lot of Governement-funded organisms. You really have to study Quebec history and politic... I did, actually... for 4 years in Université Laval. They even gave me a nice little diploma for that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I did, actually... for 4 years in Université Laval. They even gave me a nice little diploma for that... And you still say the BQ is unefficient for the Québec ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 And you still say the BQ is unefficient for the Québec ? Of course. The arguement that the BQ is making Quebec's demands heard is BS. Nothing in the BQ platform is different than from the PQ program. Its a standard, well-known position in the rest of the Federalist partys. Having the BQ in Ottawa is actually a self-defeating purpose because it shows it's possible for Quebec sovereignists to be heard in Ottawa; which goes against one of the keystones of the sovereignty premise, which is that Quebecois can't be heard in the Federation. Like I said, the BQ's utility is nothing but to park votes while listening from offers from other partys. Its swing votes on stand-by. The Quebec metropolitain region was faster to catch on their voting power by giving Harper the majority, with strings attached which gave the UNESCO seat and the Nation reconnaissance. There's no really mistery or right-wing swerve in Quebec City. Its just that voters here are much more pragmatic, opportunistic and interested than in, say, the Isle of Montreal where every party can take votes for granted since polarization between rich-poor, anglo-franco and etc. is much greater. So the two things you credited to the BQ should actually be attributed to the voters in QC who accepted Harper's offer and elected him. That's a tough one to swallow for Montreal-centric people because of the polarization. Yet they seem to forget that the BQ is actually the offspring of the old federal Tories; and that the Bouchard's and Lapierre's who split from the PC back then did so because of the Meech Lake failure; which was based on a doctrine put together and influenced both by the Lévesque PQ governement of 81-82 and by the Bourassa PLQ of the following government. So the idea at the center of the BQ creation was shared by both federalists and sovereignists. It has become the standard constitutionnal position of Quebec. Back when the BQ was created, it was a temporary mesure to represent Quebec on the Federal scene while the socvereignist movement was growing and a victorious referendum was possible. That's why the BQ was sovereignist, because they had to be in Ottawa to negociate the after-math of a Yes vote in a referendum. As soon as the No won, the BQ became useless because its casus belli was the referendum. But like I said in another thread, any organization's vital function is to perpetuate itself. So even if the BQ was past it's expiration date, it kept on going by changing it's mission and saying that now they were there to defend Quebec's interests; which was a cause lost in advance since the PLC's mission is the exact opposite. It was statu quo at it's best because none of either side could move. The only thing that could undo that standoff was a change of federal governement and only voters could do that. The BQ had nothing to do with any of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) Of course. The arguement that the BQ is making Quebec's demands heard is BS. Nothing in the BQ platform is different than from the PQ program. Its a standard, well-known position in the rest of the Federalist partys. Having the BQ in Ottawa is actually a self-defeating purpose because it shows it's possible for Quebec sovereignists to be heard in Ottawa; which goes against one of the keystones of the sovereignty premise, which is that Quebecois can't be heard in the Federation. Like I said, the BQ's utility is nothing but to park votes while listening from offers from other partys. Its swing votes on stand-by. The Quebec metropolitain region was faster to catch on their voting power by giving Harper the majority, with strings attached which gave the UNESCO seat and the Nation reconnaissance. There's no really mistery or right-wing swerve in Quebec City. Its just that voters here are much more pragmatic, opportunistic and interested than in, say, the Isle of Montreal where every party can take votes for granted since polarization between rich-poor, anglo-franco and etc. is much greater. So the two things you credited to the BQ should actually be attributed to the voters in QC who accepted Harper's offer and elected him. That's a tough one to swallow for Montreal-centric people because of the polarization. Yet they seem to forget that the BQ is actually the offspring of the old federal Tories; and that the Bouchard's and Lapierre's who split from the PC back then did so because of the Meech Lake failure; which was based on a doctrine put together and influenced both by the Lévesque PQ governement of 81-82 and by the Bourassa PLQ of the following government. So the idea at the center of the BQ creation was shared by both federalists and sovereignists. It has become the standard constitutionnal position of Quebec. Back when the BQ was created, it was a temporary mesure to represent Quebec on the Federal scene while the socvereignist movement was growing and a victorious referendum was possible. That's why the BQ was sovereignist, because they had to be in Ottawa to negociate the after-math of a Yes vote in a referendum. As soon as the No won, the BQ became useless because its casus belli was the referendum. But like I said in another thread, any organization's vital function is to perpetuate itself. So even if the BQ was past it's expiration date, it kept on going by changing it's mission and saying that now they were there to defend Quebec's interests; which was a cause lost in advance since the PLC's mission is the exact opposite. It was statu quo at it's best because none of either side could move. The only thing that could undo that standoff was a change of federal governement and only voters could do that. The BQ had nothing to do with any of it. ok maybe, but as a province IN the Canada, something i cant stand anymore, the Québec have to get a voice. A big part of our province wish to separate from the rest of Canada. Yeah we lost the 2 referendums but 49% of the province voted FOR the independance. Don't forget that. And the BQ is there for them. When I see Harper or any federal government who want to give some power to the religion, to try to eliminate gay and lesbian weddings, go ahead with any wars in the world or be against abortion, etc, I just think this country doesn't represents my values and those of around 49% of my province. Without the BQ, some legislations and laws in this sense might be adopted. Alors quand j'entends des fédéralistes du Manitoba ou de l'Alberta pleurer parce que les transferts fédéraux se retrouvent dans nos programmes sociaux, ben j'me dis "calissez nous patience avec votre Canada, tout ce qu'on veut c'est notre pays francophone qui a été CONQUIS par la guerre soit dit en passant, pis qui ne véhicule pas des valeurs de l'Ouest, notamment la religion. Je continues à croire que le Québec comme une nation entière est possible. J'ai hâte au jour où je ne payerai que des impôts à 1 seul palier de gouvernement, le jour où mon pays ne figurera plus sur la liste des pays potentiellement victimes du terrorisme, le jour où mon pays ne sera pas simplement un terrain de bataille entre libéraux et conservateurs, le jour où la religion sortira complétement de nos institutions gouvernementales et scolaires, le jour où on pourra fêter Noël en paix en sachant très bien que cette fête est commerciale et non religieuse, le jour où le Québec contrôlera complètement sa destinée, le jour où mon pays sera LIBRE. Edited March 23, 2007 by JoeLassister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 ok maybe, but as a province IN the Canada, something i cant stand anymore, the Québec have to get a voice. A big part of our province wish to separate from the rest of Canada. Yeah we lost the 2 referendums but 49% of the province voted FOR the independance. Don't forget that. And the BQ is there for them. When I see Harper or any federal government who want to give some power to the religion, to try to eliminate gay and lesbian weddings, go ahead with any wars in the world or be against abortion, etc, I just think this country doesn't represents my values and those of around 49% of my province. Without the BQ, some legislations and laws in this sense might be adopted. Alors quand j'entends des fédéralistes du Manitoba ou de l'Alberta pleurer parce que les transferts fédéraux se retrouvent dans nos programmes sociaux, ben j'me dis "calissez nous patience avec votre Canada, tout ce qu'on veut c'est notre pays francophone qui a été CONQUIS par la guerre soit dit en passant, pis qui ne véhicule pas des valeurs de l'Ouest, notamment la religion. Je continues à croire que le Québec comme une nation entière est possible. J'ai hâte au jour où je ne payerai que des impôts à 1 seul palier de gouvernement, le jour où mon pays ne figurera plus sur la liste des pays potentiellement victimes du terrorisme, le jour où mon pays ne sera pas simplement un terrain de bataille entre libéraux et conservateurs, le jour où la religion sortira complétement de nos institutions gouvernementales et scolaires, le jour où on pourra fêter Noël en paix en sachant très bien que cette fête est commerciale et non religieuse, le jour où le Québec contrôlera complètement sa destinée, le jour où mon pays sera LIBRE. Ugh... I won't even set foot in that type of self-delusional rhetoric. I've heard the tune, even sang it when I was young and innocent... but sooner or later you've got to realize there's a whole lot shades of grey between black and white, a whole lot of possibilities other than sovereignty or statu quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Ugh... I won't even set foot in that type of self-delusional rhetoric. I've heard the tune, even sang it when I was young and innocent... but sooner or later you've got to realize there's a whole lot shades of grey between black and white, a whole lot of possibilities other than sovereignty or statu quo. Maybe, but the minute someone or a party will show me only one possibility better than sovereignty of the Québec, i'll trust him and believe in this. For now.... no one standed up in this sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mont Royale Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 When I see Harper or any federal government who want to give some power to the religion, to try to eliminate gay and lesbian weddings, go ahead with any wars in the world or be against abortion, etc, I just think this country doesn't represents my values and those of around 49% of my province. Those policies are unpopular/controversial in the rest of Canada, too. Separating isn't going to solve a conflict of opinion with the government of the day, because sooner or later the government of a Quebec libre will take a stand that is against what you believe. That's just the nature of trying to represent a large group of people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 The BQ serves no purpose in the federal government. They're just a protest party. Then during the elections they talk about a national hockey team. I mean seriously, come on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) The way I see the Bloc compared to the PQ is the PQ actually serves a purpose. As for the Bloc the answer is; "Why not eh?" Why not? I would. They're there, right? Edited March 23, 2007 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I did, actually... for 4 years in Université Laval. They even gave me a nice little diploma for that... Agreed, Quebec would have a lot more influence if they stopped voting BQ and voted in the real parties. Ask yourself why Harper is so eagre to shovel money at Quebec? Is it because he is scared of the BQ? or because he has won some votes in Quebec and thinks he can win a lot more? Enough to make the difference between minority and majority. Being potential kingmaker for a majority government is better than throwing your vote at a fringe party who's votes have no influence in the governance of the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Ask yourself why Harper is so eagre to shovel money at Quebec? Call me an idealist if you'd like but i'd like to think than he does it because he's simply respecting his promises than he made during the last campaign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 He also promised not to tax income trusts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Being potential kingmaker for a majority government is better than throwing your vote at a fringe party who's votes have no influence in the governance of the country. BINGO! It's one thing to represent interests, it's another thing to get meet those interests. Since the BQ can never form the Governement, they can only act as spokepersons for certain Quebecois. It's alright in some ways; but it's nothing compared to actual power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataclaw Posted March 24, 2007 Author Share Posted March 24, 2007 Wow, have you seen the latest polls? Absolute total 3-way tie in the popular vote, with the PQ and PLQ neck and neck in seats. I'm nervous.. hell, i'm downright scared. I'm scared that the PQ will win and call a referendum. I'm scared of the economic ruin that would follow... I'm scared of the lasting long-term negative effects of a referendum. I'm scared that monday will set it all in motion. I'm scared that my own single PLQ vote is insufficient to stop this disaster-in-the-making. :closedeyes: Why oh why can't people see a referendum would just be suicide for the whole province. Arghhh.. it's so frustrating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Wow, have you seen the latest polls? Absolute total 3-way tie in the popular vote, with the PQ and PLQ neck and neck in seats. I'm nervous.. hell, i'm downright scared. I'm scared that the PQ will win and call a referendum. I'm scared of the economic ruin that would follow... I'm scared of the lasting long-term negative effects of a referendum. I'm scared that monday will set it all in motion. I'm scared that my own single PLQ vote is insufficient to stop this disaster-in-the-making. :closedeyes: Why oh why can't people see a referendum would just be suicide for the whole province. Arghhh.. it's so frustrating. Man if the Montenegro can live independant from the Serbie, why do Québec couldn't from Canada??? Stop thinking the Québec ain't worth a shit without Canada, we're not poor, we're intelligent and strong. Be proud! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montenegrin_i...erendum%2C_2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 I'm not worried as much as you Cataclaw, the rise of the ADQ in the Québec City area, Chaudière-Appalache and Mauricie makes a majority almost impossible to achieve for this election. Mario Dumont made it very clear than he wont help Boisclair in any way in his referendum plans so even if Boisclair somehow wins a minority Monday he wont be able to call a referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Man if the Montenegro can live independant from the Serbie, why do Québec couldn't from Canada??? Stop thinking the Québec ain't worth a shit without Canada, we're not poor, we're intelligent and strong. Be proud! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montenegrin_i...erendum%2C_2006 Montenegro? Ok, I could dig the sovereignists when they compared Quebec to some Scandinavian countries or even Israel when they tried to estimate the type of country we could be... But Montenegro? Who in Hell wants to be Montenegro!?!?! We ARE poor. 42% of our population lives off the Government. That's almost half our population who dont contribute (ie. produce) anything to our economy. And we've got an agin population, so more and more people to care for and less and less people to carry what is already a much too heavy tax burden. We're smart? Our top graduates all leave for better jobs in the rest of the World because we can't offer them those opportunities. The rest can't find jobs in their field because there isn't enough good quality jjob, because the economy is stagnant. That's without even thinking about the millions of morons who watch TVA. Forget about all that BS you've been told by your sovereignist teachers and sovereignists artists and sovereignists friends and sovereignists journalists and so-called experts. That's all a myth. We're indebt, we're aging, we're self-complacent, we're overtaxed. Wake up for crissake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 I'm going to take some flak for this but IMO, the PQ has always demonstated one recurring type of behaviour: That is; the self serving bias. "This is our tendency to take credit for success (self-enhancing bias) and deny any responsibility for failure (self-protective bias)." What is right? If life is good in Quebec it's on account of the Pequistes. What is wrong? Well, that's all Ottawa and the R.O.C. right? Good job keeping the Nords in that cash gushing province. Good job to the provincial government of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 I'm going to take some flak for this but IMO, the PQ has always demonstated one recurring type of behaviour: That is; the self serving bias. "This is our tendency to take credit for success (self-enhancing bias) and deny any responsibility for failure (self-protective bias)." What is right? If life is good in Quebec it's on account of the Pequistes. What is wrong? Well, that's all Ottawa and the R.O.C. right? Good job keeping the Nords in that cash gushing province. Good job to the provincial government of the time. Of course. To validate sovereignty, you have to work from the premise that life would be better off without the ROC, that Canada is holding Quebec back. It might actually have been true 30-20 years ago when Quebec was on the upswing and many Federal policies were a disaster for the province (like Trudeau's oil policies that lead to Montreal's decline) but you can't say its still valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Wow, have you seen the latest polls? Absolute total 3-way tie in the popular vote, with the PQ and PLQ neck and neck in seats. I'm nervous.. hell, i'm downright scared. I'm scared that the PQ will win and call a referendum. I'm scared of the economic ruin that would follow... I'm scared of the lasting long-term negative effects of a referendum. I'm scared that monday will set it all in motion. I'm scared that my own single PLQ vote is insufficient to stop this disaster-in-the-making. :closedeyes: Why oh why can't people see a referendum would just be suicide for the whole province. Arghhh.. it's so frustrating. Well, you can add my PLQ vote buddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Maybe, but the minute someone or a party will show me only one possibility better than sovereignty of the Québec, i'll trust him and believe in this. For now.... no one standed up in this sense. Ok Joe. You can have your country. Be warned that metro-Montreal then becomes a city-state that remains part of Canada. My house JUMPED in value as soon as the PQ was ousted by Jean Charest and the liberals. Of course, you'll tell us that was a coincidence. The whole QC independance thing is such a tired act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataclaw Posted March 24, 2007 Author Share Posted March 24, 2007 Well, the latest polls are encouraging.. PLQ with a razor-thin lead of PQ/ADQ which would equate a PLQ minority. We'll see monday. Two days to go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 (edited) As a staunch federalist I want Charest to have a majority. On the other hand it may not be good government. Dumont is the wild card. The PQ must be feeling annoyed that there is a legit 3rd voice which cuts down the potential. This is fantastic. Besides, what is all this seperation stuff? Mon Cher Quebec does not want to go. It'll take at least 2 years for any support to emerge to have a hope of achieving sovereignty politically. Especially now that the budget has handed over some well deserved cash... Edited March 24, 2007 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.