CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

With regards to Quebec:
Quebec should stay if it gets what it wants.  5%  [ 1 ]
Quebec should stay even if nothing changes.  76%  [ 16 ]
Undecided  19%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 21

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 5233
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:05 am
 


Gunnair Gunnair:
Unsound Unsound:
Please point out where the federal government has been "anti-quebec" in it's policies.


If anti-Quebec means dumping truckloads of cash into Quebec then yes, the Federal government is very anti-Quebec.

Hey! That's enough reality out of you young man!


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
Profile
Posts: 5
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:57 am
 


Well to start long time Quebec Tory Peter White went on record to say "People hate the guy," "They really hate him. They think he's got horns and a tail and eats babies, and I'm sure Harper has no idea that this is the case"
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews ... id=6820990

As for clash in ideals that caused this. There are several regulations and policies that are seen as anti-Quebec from abolishing the gun registry to changes in environmental policy to the huge mega-prison bill. Marois went on record labeling Harper's government as anti-Quebec, but his side is a bit biased.

Again Peter White criticizes that:
"All the policies that Harper adopts or has done since the election seem to offend Quebecers and the media jump all over i it," said Peter White, an outspoken veteran Conservative who recently headed a party riding association in Quebec's Eastern Townships. "Every time (PQ leader) Pauline Marois attacks Harper, she goes up in the polls, and that's why she's doing so well because Harper is giving her all these targets to attack and she can just say: 'What are we Quebecers doing in this weird country of Harper's?'"

Some of those targets include recent policies and decisions including the nomination of unilingual anglophones to key positions such as the auditor general's office, dismantling the longgun registry, the decision to pull out of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, proposed criminal justice legislation, as well as Senate reform and plans to weaken Quebec's representation in the House of Commons.

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology ... story.html#ixzz1zC6V1u9i

That whole list of changes to policy is seen as anti-Quebec. I am not saying they are or are not, but they do clash with the ideals of the average Quebecois; which can be seen by the fact of the PQ's popularity going up every time Harper does something.

I do not think I need to explain how the provincial Liberal Party has been anti-Quebec right now. I can go do it if you request though.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8851
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:38 am
 


Yup. Anything that brings Quebec into line with the other provinces and territories is definitely 'Anti-Quebec'!


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23041
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:56 am
 


martin14 martin14:
Economic growth will always defeat seperatism.

It only crops up during tough times, because some are foolishly led to
believe it would change something for the better.


Good point!


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
Profile
Posts: 5
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:58 am
 


Well one must remember that each province is essentially different from every other province. Achieve complete unity is a near impossibility due to cultural, geographical, and demographic difference in each region. Essentially Quebec is the most different due to its position as a nation within a nation. So bringing Quebec into line with the "rest" of Canada is really hard considering how different every other province is from each other. Unless of course you are talking just by legal standards, that would essentially be possible. However, by cultural ideals it is impossible; considering the rest of Canada is essentially not unified culturally either.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8851
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:11 am
 


Armitage Armitage:
Well one must remember that each province is essentially different from every other province. Achieve complete unity is a near impossibility due to cultural, geographical, and demographic difference in each region. Essentially Quebec is the most different due to its position as a nation within a nation. So bringing Quebec into line with the "rest" of Canada is really hard considering how different every other province is from each other. Unless of course you are talking just by legal standards, that would essentially be possible. However, by cultural ideals it is impossible; considering the rest of Canada is essentially not unified culturally either.



I don't agree with the 'cultural differences across Canada' sentiment. Every province has 'pockets' of the same cultures. ie; every province has French communities. All I, and ROC are advocating is that, for example, every citizen receives $100.00 and what they do with it is there business. That is not good enough for Quebec. They jump up and down screaming " Everyone else can have $100.00. That is fair. However, we are entitled to $150.00 for each citizen of Quebec"!


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:11 am
 


Yogi Yogi:
All I, and ROC are advocating is that, for example, every citizen receives $100.00 and what they do with it is there business. That is not good enough for Quebec. They jump up and down screaming " Everyone else can have $100.00. That is fair. However, we are entitled to $150.00 for each citizen of Quebec"!


Then why not let them go? Let's see how well they'd do on their own without any cash infusion from the ROC to keep them afloat.


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
Profile
Posts: 5
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:37 am
 


Yogi Yogi:
I don't agree with the 'cultural differences across Canada' sentiment. Every province has 'pockets' of the same cultures. ie; every province has French communities. All I, and ROC are advocating is that, for example, every citizen receives $100.00 and what they do with it is there business. That is not good enough for Quebec. They jump up and down screaming " Everyone else can have $100.00. That is fair. However, we are entitled to $150.00 for each citizen of Quebec"!


I would have to agree and disagree here. I disagree with the statement that each area isn't different culturally. Large rural communities such as what you see in a large part of Saskatchewan are culturally going to be different than manufacturing and services areas such as southern Ontario. This is just due to geographical differences and choice of jobs as well as immigration. But also historical factors play differences as well. Back when Canada was becoming a country, what parts of the country were delegated to certain things has a large impact on the current culture. As well political history has played a large part in the formation of culture. A large part of the current attitudes in Quebec can be attributed to the silent revolution. After all think about it, what common daily practices do you have with someone living in Nunavut? Daily practices and morals are what make a culture in contemporary societies. If you do not share that, there is a difference in culture. Of course culture is also impacted by wealth, historically richer provinces will have difference in cultures. More rich people which usually means more high arts, more consumerism, etc. Canada is a very diverse country due to its sheer vastness of geography. It is a near impossibility for people to share a common culture from that far away.

What I do agree with is your last point. People of Quebec should not feel a sense of entitlement based on culture. I agree we should invest in making cultures strong, but there is a point when it becomes useless. After all you should not rob one culture in order to make your culture richer. That is just selfishness. Furthermore governments can not fund culture the way Canadian governments have traditionally funded culture. You can't throw money at people and say create "Canadian" or "Quebecois" culture. Then you just have a bunch of people spouting out useless patriotic works that do more to create nationalism than culture.

Also I never said separation was good on an economical level. I stated that it is an emotional issue that can be capitalized right now by the fact that both levels of government are passing through legislation that the majority of the people of Quebec dislike.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12398
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:57 am
 


Quebec's buying up all the Canadian Tire stores so they will have their own money after separation.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1261
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:45 pm
 


PluggyRug PluggyRug:
Quebec's buying up all the Canadian Tire stores so they will have their own money after separation.



Dude, they don't even sell beer at Canadian Tire. :lol:


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Calgary Flames


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4039
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:24 pm
 


PluggyRug PluggyRug:
Quebec's buying up all the Canadian Tire stores so they will have their own money after separation.


ROTFL R=UP



-J.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23565
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:55 pm
 


$1:
John Ivison: Ambivalence rising as more Canadians ‘don’t really care’ if Quebec separates
John Ivison  Jun 28, 2012 – 8:16 PM ET | Last Updated: Jun 29, 2012 9:23 AM ET


Back in 1969, when six members of a young comedy troupe were mulling names for their new show on the BBC, the title Whither Canada? was suggested by one of the group.

Wisely, the name was ditched it in favour of Monty Python’s Flying Circus (while retaining it as the title of the first episode of the first series).

The initial attraction was, presumably, its absurdity – what could be of less interest than domestic Canadian politics and the constant French-English bickering?

René Levesque had just been elected first leader of the newly formed Parti Québécois and Quebec was convulsed by disputes over language laws that culminated in Mr. Leveseque’s Bill 101 in 1977.

The internecine squabbles may have seemed absurd to those beyond Canada’s shores but they were treated with deadly seriousness within the country. The threat of separation has long resulted in more than reasonable accommodation for Quebec.

Even before Confederation, George Brown complained: “What has French Canadianism been denied? Nothing. It bars all it dislikes – it extorts all its demands and it grows insolent over its victories.”

With an economically ascendant Quebec, there was a sense that the country needed the province to prosper. During the 1995 referendum campaign, there was strong support for keeping Quebec in Confederation, culminating in unity rallies funded by corporate Canada.

But that was then. Has there ever been a time when Canadians outside Quebec have ever been more ambivalent about the possibility of the province separating? Unlikely, according to a new Ipsos Reid poll released Thursday, which suggests almost half (49%) of Canadians living outside Quebec agree they “don’t really care if Quebec separates.”

The same number agreed “it’s not really a big deal” if the province leaves Canada.

The Ipsos poll suggests Quebec support for sovereignty is higher than it was in 1999 (38% against 30%) but is lower than its high of 47% in 1990.

But in the rest of Canada, opinion has hardened dramatically. A strong majority (57%) outside the province does not think there should be a political or economic association with an independent Quebec – a dramatic shift from the 66% who were in favour of a continuing association in a similar poll 20 years ago.

Perhaps the most worrying development is the 27% of Albertans who said they would support their province separating from Canada to create their own country (albeit from a small sample size).

This is the political manifestation of Canada’s emerging two-track economy.

National unity is not seen as being in jeopardy – and even if it is, who cares? Or so the thinking appears to go.

The West is on the rise and sees the East, particularly Quebec, as a burden.

The changing nature of international trade means that 70% of the population now lives in “have not” provinces, which require ever growing inter-governmental transfers to maintain comparable levels of health and education services at comparable levels of taxation.

The less strident, more defensive brand of nationalism on display in Quebec these days reflects this shift in economic power. The PQ may win the pending provincial election, due as early as late summer, but that is more reflective of distaste with the government of Jean Charest.

It also suggests the sovereigntist grievances in the province have been salved to some degree by Stephen Harper’s decentralized view of Confederation, which has seen the federal government retreat from many areas of Quebec life.

“The edge has come off it,” said Darrell Bricker, chief executive of Ipsos Reid. “It’s not seen as a 21st century debate.”

Yet the Ipsos poll suggests that, even if the demands of the initiator of the break-up are less vocal, a turning point may have been reached that makes the uncoupling inevitable.

Being partners has not been a major component of the Quebec identity for a long time, but it seems that it no longer matters to an increasing number of Canadians’ sense of self.

Michael Ignatieff, the former Liberal leader, got into some hot water recently when he said that Canada and Quebec are effectively two separate countries, with little to say to one another. “There’s a kind of contract of mutual indifference, which is very striking for someone of my generation,” he said.

His observation that Quebec independence is the logical outcome of the current disenchantment does not seem far-fetched. One day, there will be a government in Alberta that resolves enough is enough, when it comes to the ever-increasing demands from the eastern provinces for equalization payments. At that point, those Quebecers who are only in Canada for what they can get out of it may decide it’s time to go it alone.

When that day comes, the contract between Canada and Quebec will, in the immortal words of the Dead Parrot sketch, cease to be, expire and go to meet its maker.

Whither Canada indeed?

National Post

• Email: jivison@nationalpost.com | Twitter:



Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Previous  1  2



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.