Skip to content
Archive of posts filed under the Quebec politics category.
« Older Entries

The Asbestos Enablers

Posted by Joanne on 5 February 2010, 7:58 am

Even though Jean Charest and the Federal Conservative government frequently find themselves at odds on environmental issues, they appear to be co-conspirators regarding the export of asbestos as Jeffrey Simpson points out this morning:

…But Mr. Charest said it was up to India to act if it felt asbestos led to health problems. He was accompanied by a representative of an asbestos lobby group that receives money from both the federal and provincial governments; his group, he said, gives information to asbestos users about its possible risks. In other words, caveat emptor! Meantime, it’s business as usual for Quebec’s asbestos exports…

Or is it just the environment that Jean Charest cares about? Not the health of people in developing countries?

And to the Conservative government, how about showing some backbone on this issue? You really don’t have much more to lose in Quebec anyway.

And to Mr. Iffy – Have you finally figured out where you stand?

Hypocrites the lot of you!

*    *    *    *

*   *   *   *

Charest faces questions about export of asbestos during visit to India – Record

UN climate guru on skeptics: “hope that they apply it (asbestos) to their faces every day” - B.C Blue

Charest: Asbestos “is politically part of our history” – B.C. Blue

*   *   *   *

Feb. 12 Update

On hot seat over asbestos – Gazette:

…On the trade mission, the premier was quoted in La Presse as saying “Chrysotile (asbestos) can be used in a safe manner; this is what WHO reports say. It is not a banned substance. It is up to the government of India to put the necessary laws in place.”

In fact, the World Health Organization has said that all types of asbestos, including the type mined in Quebec (chrysotile) cause asbestosis, mesothelioma and cancer of the lung, and recommends against continued use of any form of asbestos. The International Labour Organization adopted a resolution in 2006 urging the elimination of use of all forms of asbestos and of materials containing asbestos…

Filed under Canadian Government, Flicking politicians, Follow the money, Iffy, Iggo Waffles, Michael Ignatieff, Quebec politics, Voter cynicism, economy, health, hypocrisy.
28 Comments

The Ink Blot Flyers

Posted by Joanne on 7 July 2009, 10:26 am

O.K. We have a definite variance of opinions on the Conservative flyers being distributed in Quebec. Obviously my readers want to discuss this so I thought I may as well start a new thread.

On one side we have the belief that this is not a good idea, spearheaded by Gabby. She worries that this approach will backfire and would prefer to see some positive ads put out emphasizing what the Harper Government is doing to protect children, etc.

On the other we have Ed, Bruce, Lorraine, Mary T, Bec and others saying that charges of the Bloc being pedophile-lovers have been read into the text – that in fact the issue has to do with child prostitution and trafficking and that the opposition parties and liberal-friendly media are deliberately interpreting it otherwise.

ChuckerCanuck shoots down the Bloc’s bogus objections to the bill. (C-268)

[Voting record here.]

Richco says that we shouldn’t be talking about this at all -  That there are much more important stories out there like this: Tories climbing rapidly to top of the polls.

My personal preference is for the Conservative Party to lay off attacking the Bloc. I think it’s a losing proposition no matter how factual in information. On the other hand, getting positive messaging out there is a good idea. So I guess I agree with Gabby.

Not that anyone is necessarily listening.

*   *   *   *

Update: Conservative Messaging II: Are we taking control? – Sean Calder at The Politic

Filed under Canadian Politics, Coddling the criminals, Crime, MSM bias, Quebec politics, Truth ads.
59 Comments

Dear Quebec – Why do you prefer Michael Ignatieff?

Posted by Joanne on 8 June 2009, 10:03 am

I have been flummoxed for several weeks by the this question -  Why is Michael Ignatieff’s popularity continuing to rise in Quebec?

Is it because:

(a) He’s not Stephane Dion?

(b) He’s not Stephen Harper?

(c) Quebecers prefer style over substance?

(d) They have a thing about eyebrows?

If the answer is all of the above, then Canada is in big trouble.

If  it is simply (b), then there is hope because so far Michael Ignatieff has failed to distinguish himself from Stephen Harper in any notable way  in terms of policy and ideological leanings (except for Iggy’s weak E.I. proposal.)

Today’s National Post editorial points this out After the Honeymoon:

…The neoconfriendly Mr. Ignatieff has done little to separate himself from the Conservatives ideologically, and he can do little Liberal monument-building with the federal balance sheet so far underwater. He and the Prime Minister both pushed for Quebec to be recognized in Parliament as a “nation.” He and the Prime Minister, thank goodness, both refuse to follow through with explicit constitutional tinkering.

The editorial goes on to show how PMSH has actually done more for Quebec than Iggy possibly could given the Liberal party’s traditional ideological view of concentration of power at the Federal level:

The Prime Minister can take credit in Quebec for actual devolutionary accomplishments, ones that would have been unthinkable for a Liberal government, such as giving the province a seat at UNESCO…

Add to that the current revolt of the grassroots concerning the Tory Bill on crime which is an area that has always been a little ‘iffy’ for Quebec, the asbestos flipflop, and Iggy’s rejection of C-307, and you really have to wonder how long this honeymoon is going to last.

Filed under Canadian Politics, Crime, Iggyssiah, LPC, Michael Ignatieff, Quebec politics.
116 Comments

Quebec Conundrum Part Deux

Posted by Joanne on 26 May 2009, 4:43 pm

Over the past few months we here at BLY have tried to understand what exactly it is that makes Quebec tick politically.

Personally, I see a culture of self-interest that plays one faction against the other, hoping to get the best deal. Always in the back pocket is the unity/separation card which Quebec partisans and scheming politicians are not shy to play when the chips are down.

Looking back at Conundrum #1 back in October, Gabby’s observations  were right on – especially regarding the Conservative Party’s questioning the relevance of the Bloc:

5. Anyone who watches QP regularly has heard Conservative MPs question the validity of the Bloc’s 18 years spent in Parliament. Although more and more Quebecers, both ordinary citizens and some media personalities, have been asking the same questions about the relevance of the Bloc being in Ottawa, the Conservatives should not have pushed those buttons so furiously. Notice how Michael Fortier’s play backfired.

So learning from this, my readers and I feel that the best approach is to be honest, but don’t attack the Bloc. Let Iggy and Duceppe duke that one out.

Nicola pointed out that young people in Quebec are brainwashed with the refrain of “C’est la faute du fédéral”. Well, what can you do to counter that?

But at least let’s show some integrity.

Don’t pander to Quebec, but don’t ignore it either. Today’s Gazette editorial makes an eloquent plea for Prime Minister Harper to continue to work towards including Quebec in his plans, and they note that he still begins his ‘public pronouncements in French’. He should continue to do so, because to stop would be interpreted as giving up.

Let’s treat Quebec with respect; but no more special favours.

The way forward is fairness for all provinces. And then let the chips fall where they may.


Wednesday Update: Bloc takes the lead in Quebec (translation from Cyerpresse – H/T National Newswatch)

EI threatens to backfire on Liberals – Chantel Hebert (Star)

And this is almost worth a separate post, but I don’t have the time this morning:

Conservatives should go back to what works in Quebec – L. Ian MacDonald:

…But there’s one element of the Quebec City speech that’s been unfulfilled, and it could prove very strategic in the event Harper chose to revisit it. And that’s his promise to limit the federal spending power in areas of provincial jurisdiction unless a majority of provinces signed on to it.

In other words, Ottawa would not invade provincial jurisdictions such as health care, education, and cities, unless invited in.

If you think the Québécois nation resolution had the potential to send all three opposition parties scattering in all directions, a resolution or bill to limit the federal spending power would sow discord among the Liberals, while the Bloc would be forced to support it even while denouncing it as inadequate, leaving the NDP completely out in the cold as a party that has always supported new federal programs in provincial jurisdictions.

This is about core values and conceptions of federalism. Harper has always been very comfortable supporting the constitutional division powers in Sections 91 (federal powers) and 92 (provincial jurisdictions) of the Constitution Act. Like every Conservative leader from Macdonald to Mulroney, he is a BNA prime minister. It’s the vision the founding fathers gave us in the British North America Act, and it has worked pretty well.

The Liberals are the party of the federal spending power, from Pearson to Martin. They are the party of “national standards” in the current debate over EI reform. The Libs would be very uncomfortable and divided in their caucus as between Quebec and the rest of Canada…

Filed under Canadian Politics, Quebec, Quebec politics.
92 Comments

It’s all in how you spin it

Posted by Joanne on 13 March 2009, 7:05 pm

If I were a Star headline writer, I might say this – Poll puts Liberals and Tories in virtual tie.

On the other hand, I could say this:

Latest Harris-Decima Poll shows Liberals closing in on their Coalition partners in Quebec – Bloc at 39%, Liberals at 32%.

And yet we have to wonder if Don MacPherson’s predictions might come true:

In Quebec politics, particular value is attached to the signature of even a politician. Duceppe’s party and his own political career originated in the anger at English Canadian premiers for renouncing their signatures (actually, those of their predecessors) on the Meech Lake constitutional accord granting a form of special status to Quebec….

Who’s going to win? This one will be great fun to watch from the sidelines. Grab your popcorn & beer.

Filed under Iggyssiah, MSM bias, Michael Ignatieff, Quebec politics.
24 Comments

Woe Canada

Posted by Joanne on 25 February 2009, 7:27 pm

It used to be that the thugs who made the threats of violence were the ones in trouble.

[Background]

Update: More at the National Post.

Filed under Appeasement never works, Canadian Politics, Political correctness, Quebec, Quebec politics.
56 Comments

No more appeasement for Quebec

Posted by Joanne on 24 February 2009, 7:35 am

The National Post has a dynamite editorial this morning, suggesting that the Harper Government stop mollycoddling Quebec because it has nothing to lose:

…Since October’s national campaign, Conservative support in Quebec has nearly halved. Where eights months ago the Tories rivalled the Bloc Quebecois for first place in popular support, now they stand at third or even fourth in most polls. Last week, a CROP poll found the Tories with 16% support — equal to that of the NDP — and Mr. Harper’s personal popularity below 20%.

That means the Prime Minister and Cabinet can do the right thing without risking their popularity: They have none.

They can start by reinstating the Plains of Abraham re-enactment and, if need be, providing federal security for the event. They also can end the unofficial federal policy that as near to half as possible of all federal defence spending must go to manufacturers in Quebec.

While they’re at it, they should tell the truth about equalization. Quebec annually receives the most money — nearly 50% of total equalization, despite the fact that for decades now, Quebec’s per capita provincial GDP has been just 3% to 8% below the national average. There is no “fiscal imbalance,” at least not between Ottawa and Quebec. Most federal leaders know the stats, they have merely been too frightened about the prospect of Quebec leaving to give it voice…

Meanwhile, Pauline Marois declares that the solution for Quebec regarding the current economic crisis is separation:

“It is time for Quebec to take charge. When we need to make sudden changes of course, as is now the case, do we really have the means to deal with the in-coherency of a federation? We must finish with being wards of another nation. The context proves it. Sovereignty is urgent!”

The Post editorial staff is right. The Harper Government has nothing to lose at this point by demonstrating some tough love regarding Quebec.  The spoiled little child needs to be allowed to grow up.

Let Mickey, Jack and Gilles battle it out for the title of Greatest Enabler, while PM Harper returns some balance to the family dynamics.

*   *   *   *

Related: A Nation’s Amnesia by Rudyard Griffiths.


Noteworthy Letter to the editor – A loss Quebecers should celebrate by Peter Goldring, MP for Edmonton East, Ottawa.

UPDATE: We’ve got a newspaper flame war, folks! Adam Radwanski from the Globe says, Tell the National Post where to get off:

…This, though, has to be the one of the stupidest and most irresponsible editorials we’ve seen in this country, which is undoubtedly saying something.

Because a goofy historical re-enactment – possibly the most beside-the-point controversy imaginable in the midst of an economic crisis – was cancelled, the Post’s editorialists are basically asking the federal government to reignite the sovereignty movement…

Wednesday Update: Hugo De Grandpré of La Presse is not impressed with the Post editorial either. Quelle surprise! [Translation]

Filed under Appeasement never works, Canadian Politics, Canadian economy, Quebec, Quebec politics.
66 Comments
« Older Entries