CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30165
PostPosted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:01 pm
 


Title: Philippe Couillard tells Stephen Harper he wants Quebec to sign Constitution
Category: Political
Posted By: ShepherdsDog
Date: 2014-09-06 18:58:30
Canadian


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 42160
PostPosted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:01 pm
 


This'll give the separashits fits.


Last edited by ShepherdsDog on Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Ottawa Senators
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7684
PostPosted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:44 pm
 


ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
This'll give the seprashits fits.


It'll be a good day.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33691
PostPosted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:10 pm
 


saturn_656 saturn_656:
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
This'll give the seprashits fits.


It'll be a good day.



It'll be a great day, as long as no one wants to renegotiate.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 12:42 pm
 


It's a good idea. You saw the anti-constitutional crap that Pauline Marois tried to pull, simply as a wedge issue to pit the Quebec and Canadian governments against each other to further her own nasty purposes.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 45844
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 6:51 am
 


It will be a happy day when Quebec fully becomes part of Canada.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1332
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:35 am
 


martin14 martin14:


It'll be a great day, as long as no one wants to renegotiate.


That's the problem, though-Couillard believes that Quebec's distinct status ought to be recognized in the Constitution, and that he will try and convince his fellow premiers of that fact:

$1:

Val-d'Or — Philippe Couillard n'a rien contre le fédéralisme dans sa forme actuelle, mais cela n'empêche pas le chef du Parti libéral du Québec (PLQ) d'estimer qu'il est temps d'entreprendre des démarches afin que le caractère spécifique de la nation québécoise soit reconnu dans la Constitution canadienne.

Ainsi, s'il est porté au pouvoir, M. Couillard a l'intention d'entreprendre une tournée du Canada afin de faire passer son message auprès de ses homologues provinciaux en plus de s'adresser aux partis politiques fédéraux.



For those who don't read French, what Couillard is saying in the above post is that, while he has nothing against federalism in its curent form, he believes that it is time to take steps to recognize the specific character of the Quebec nation in the Canadian Constitution. He also mentioned his intent to visit his fellow premiers and the federal party leaders to convince them of this.

However, he also said that Constitutional talks should only take place when the time is right, and that hte main focus right now should be the economy:


$1:

Sept-Îles — Il n’y a «aucune urgence» à ramener le dossier constitutionnel à l’ordre du jour, estime le chef du Parti libéral du Québec (PLQ), Philippe Couillard, qui — s’il est élu premier ministre — a l’intention d’aborder les demandes du Québec uniquement s’il est questionné sur le sujet.

Venu présenter des éléments de son «Plan Nord+» destinés à la Côte-Nord, samedi, à Sept-Îles, le chef libéral a tempéré ses propos sur une éventuelle adhésion de la province dans la Constitution en tentant, à plusieurs reprises, d’esquiver les questions sur ce dossier épineux.

«Lorsque je vais me promener [en tant que premier ministre], ça sera d’abord et avant tout pour parler d’économie, a-t-il rappelé à maintes reprises, en conférence de presse. Si d’autres certains veulent nous parler de leur intérêt sur cette question, on le fera en présentant les intérêts du Québec.»



In this quote, Couillard mentions that his main focus is the economy, but that he would also present Quebec's desires if the Constitution was in fact opened up and the other provinces or Ottawa began discussing the matter.

As to what Quebec's desires would be, Couillard said the following:

$1:

Couillard said that if other premiers want to reopen the constitution, to discuss Senate reform or the place of First Nations, he is willing to sit down, provided Quebec’s demands in the failed Meech Lake Accord are on the table as well.

“The essential point is the formal recognition of the distinct and specific character of Quebec within Canada,” he said.




However, Couillard backtracked on the implications of this, saying that his main priority right now was the economy:

$1:

ST-TITE, Que. - Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard is now downplaying his desire to have Quebec sign the Canadian Constitution.

A day after suggesting he'd like the province to do so by 2017 for the 150th anniversary of Confederation, Couillard told reporters on Sunday that his top priority is the economy.

He said his comments on Saturday were misunderstood and that he wasn't referring to the Constitution when he said Quebec's ties with Canada should be "reaffirmed."
"I mentioned that Quebec is one of the founding people of Canada and we should pick up on that theme for the 150th anniversary of Canada," the premier told reporters in St. Tite, Que.

Couillard added the Constitution "is not an everyday priority for us. Our priority is the economy."



While Couillard might get some support from his fellow Premiers, I doubt that Stephen Harper would be interested in discussing something that goes against his own view of how Canada should be organized. That goes double for Justin Trudeau, who would never go against one of his father's most important beliefs when it comes to provincial equality. Tom Mulcair might want to, but somehow I doubt he would risk any government he might form if things go pear-shaped the way they did with Meech Lake.

The thing is, though, is that Couillard's support for reforms along the lines of the Meech Lake Accord are what many Quebec federalists not named Trudeau have been talking about for years. Stéphane Dion, even while he was leader of the federal Liberals, talked about how Canada now has the practical advantages of Meech Lake but not the symbolic benefits that would have come from Quebec's distinctiveness recognized in the Constitution, and Dion also expressed his pride at being part of "la nation québécoise". Claude Ryan expressed his support for reforms along those lines as well. Even Elijah Harper, the Aboriginal MLA from Manitoba who helped derail Meech Lake, specifically said later that his intent was not to say no to Quebec, but simply to stand up and make a point that Aboriginal people's own goals and aspirations could not be ignored.

The threat of Quebec separatism was what led Pierre Trudeau to enter politics in the first place. Many of the changes he made, for all the very real good they did, ended up becoming far more supported by Canadians outside Quebec than among the Franco-Quebecois Pierre Trudeau originally strived to convince.

The end result is that we're stuck in a seeming merry-go-round where many Franco-Quebecois are alienated from the rest of the country, feeling as though the unique challenges they face are not being addressed. Most of the rest of us, on the other hand, don't understand what the hell is up with Quebec and think that they should just make a decision on the separation thing already, convinced that Quebecers are spoiled kids who aren't happy despite all the years Quebec PMs have been dominating the scene. The mutual insults and acrimony just create more ill will, and keep the merry-go-round spinning.

Most people don't realize that those thirty-odd years of Quebec PMs are not a single attempt by Quebec to impose its view of federalism on the rest of us, nor just a struggle between federalists and separatists, but also part of a tug-of-war between Pierre Trudeau and his supporters to snuff out Quebec nationalism and impose a view of Canada that actually took much more root in the rest of the country, and those Quebecers who hoped for some recognition of their province's distinctiveness in the Constitution.

Long story short?

Couillard is taking a smart and sensible approach to this, reminding the rest of us that this issue is not resolved, but also repeating that the still-fragile economy and jobs are what is most important for Quebecers as much as for the rest of us.

However, until we build a greater understanding of the Quebec issue in the rest of the country, and also make Francophone Quebecers more comfortable with the larger pan-Canadian identity, I wouldn't hold my breath on getting Quebec's signature on the Constitution.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:39 am
 


The constitution recognizes the special status of aboriginals, why not Quebecers as well? This might be the time to strike, while there's an amenable govt in Quebec. Just because the seperatists were defeated again, doesn't mean they can't rise again too.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33691
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:00 am
 


JaredMilne JaredMilne:
$1:
Val-d'Or — Philippe Couillard n'a rien contre le fédéralisme dans sa forme actuelle, mais cela n'empêche pas le chef du Parti libéral du Québec (PLQ) d'estimer qu'il est temps d'entreprendre des démarches afin que le caractère spécifique de la nation québécoise soit reconnu dans la Constitution canadienne.

Ainsi, s'il est porté au pouvoir, M. Couillard a l'intention d'entreprendre une tournée du Canada afin de faire passer son message auprès de ses homologues provinciaux en plus de s'adresser aux partis politiques fédéraux.




However, until we build a greater understanding of the Quebec issue in the rest of the country, and also make Francophone Quebecers more comfortable with the larger pan-Canadian identity, I wouldn't hold my breath on getting Quebec's signature on the Constitution.



Fuck, I knew it was too good to be true.

Never mind, if anything the ROC is even more anti-Quebec than 15-20 years ago.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1332
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:47 pm
 


martin14 martin14:


Fuck, I knew it was too good to be true.

Never mind, if anything the ROC is even more anti-Quebec than 15-20 years ago.


If there's a silver lining, it's that the separatist movement isn't in much better shape...

$1:

Over the last week, former senior PQ ministers Jean-Francois Lisee and Bernard Drainville have each laid out their visions on how the party should proceed on the thorny subject of sovereignty.

In an open letter published Monday in Montreal La Presse, Lisee suggested if the public’s aversion to referendums remains strong in the lead up to the next election then the PQ should make a clear promise to avoid any governmental action to march the province toward an independence vote.

The PQ, in Lisee’s scenario, would instead ask voters for a mandate to govern with no sovereignty strings attached.

“I think there are times when history accelerates and we should accelerate with it,” he said in an interview Monday.

“But there are times when things go slower and this is one of them, and we should respect that.”

He said PQ founding father Rene Levesque won big by taking a similar approach during the first election after the 1980 referendum. Levesque captured 49 per cent of the popular vote in 1981.

Lisee’s strategy was published less than a week after that of Drainville, a possible leadership rival who also says the PQ should hold off on calling a referendum — at least at first.

...

In his letter Monday, Lisee said the vote’s outcome showed that roughly three-quarters of Quebecers were “resistant,” and perhaps “allergic,” to the prospect of another referendum.

“It’s something that saddens us, but it has to be taken into account,” he said in the interview.

“We have work to do to rebuild public opinion around the independence question before we go back to the electorate in an election and ask for a mandate.”


Note that Lucien Bouchard was saying the same thing even before Pauline Marois was elected:

$1:

Quebec sovereigntists woke up to a political migraine Wednesday induced by their most popular living leader.

Lucien Bouchard, the charismatic former Parti Quebecois premier who brought Quebec to within a whisker of independence, launched a broadside against his old party.
It was a rare comment on current affairs from Bouchard, who has steadfastly refused to talk publicly about politics since his 2001 retirement.

His comments were summed up in a front-page headline Wednesday in Le Devoir newspaper: Sovereignty is no longer achievable, Bouchard says.

Not only is independence on the shelf but it’s not something Quebecers should be focusing on, Bouchard said during a public forum the previous evening in Quebec City.



Before anyone thinks that this means the whole issue is finally dead and buried, we should wonder whether Bouchard seriously had some sort of miracle conversion to federalism overnight. I'd weigh the probability as being somewhere between "no chance" and "not bloody likely." More likely he thinks that Quebecers have more important things to be working out.

This is not unlike the situation of 1984, when Pierre Trudeau was riding off into the sunset and seemed to have slain the separatists. The problem was that even in the 1980 referendum, and for all the claims that Trudeau "destroyed" the separatists, the fact remains that among Francophone voters, support for separatism and federalism was split squarely down the middle, with the province's Anglophone and other minorities ensuring the win.

The fact is that, based on a lot of the stuff I've seen in my own readings, there was a large sense of political malaise in Quebec by the early 1980s, a malaise brought about by a combination of the economic pains Quebec and Canada as a whole were enduring, René Lévesque pissing off his political base by cutting government spending to balance the books (something he did a good 10-15 years before Ralph Klein and Mike Harris made it trendy in other parts of Canada) and Lévesque's admission that Brian Mulroney's overtures with Meech Lake were a "beau risque".

None of this suggests that the Franco-Quebecois enthusiastically threw their nationalism over the side and bought into Pierre Trudeau's way of looking at things. Even many Quebec federalists were infuriated at the way Trudeau patriated the Constitution, and many of them, including many of Trudeau's former colleagues from Ottawa, all came out in support of Meech Lake. Federalists like Claude Ryan were quite happy with the actual content of the Charter of Rights, but that all-important recognition of Quebec's distinctiveness, the same distinctiveness that federalist Quebecers from Georges-Etienne Cartier to Henri Bourassa to André Laurendeau to Claude Ryan to Léon and Stéphane Dion to Phillippe Couillard have all supported in their own ways, is missing from the Constitution, and this remains the sticking point which has left so many Quebecers still alienated from Canada.

I'll provide references to the written works I've read on the subject if anyone's interested...


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:50 pm
 


If there's a silver lining, it's that the separatist movement isn't in much better shape...

... and why would it be? Quebec got defacto sovereignty about almost everything, anyway.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1332
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:04 pm
 


Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:
If there's a silver lining, it's that the separatist movement isn't in much better shape...

... and why would it be? Quebec got defacto sovereignty about almost everything, anyway.


Yeah, but that doesn't mean it might not come back again, and if Quebec really has de facto sovereignty, why does separatism even still have a pulse? And we're still no better off, considering that many Quebecers remain alienated from Canada and there's a lot of ill will on both sides, which could eventually rebound into something bad.

At least one Franco-Quebecois thinks so, too...

$1:

Despite the fact political and financial power now lies in the hands of the francophone majority in Quebec, the people of the province are suffering, Denis says.

"You know, after 50-55 years of national affirmation and national struggle, and after two referendums with Quebec people voting No, I think the Quebecois people are struggling to define who they are," he says. "People voted against becoming a country and a nation, but at the same time, people from Quebec have not embraced their Canadian identity, their national identity."



They're not alone in this, of course-many Anglophones are still wondering how exactly multiculturalism ought to work, Aboriginal peoples are also trying to figure out exactly who they are, and new immigrant groups are trying to figure out exactly how they fit into Canadian society too.

However, de facto sovereignty doesn't exactly help things.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:14 pm
 


Well, unlike Scotland, Quebec is right at the heartland center of this continent and it is by no means certain how our southern neighbour will react to having their northern coastline on the Great Lakes come under the control of a possibly hostile country. There are many other complications, like a French Quebec that is surrounded by native nations who have bigger, better and older claims to the same land that the Quebecois want to take out of Canada. The U.N. may end up adjudicating on whether Quebec is any more than 100 miles wide. This will be a very complicated process regardless of how TROC reacts and the Quebecois have been lying to each other about sovereignty. The Scots may be about to pull it off but their situation is entirely different. They are surrounded by countries just like theirs ... Denmark, Norway, Iceland and Quebec is surrounded by 330,000,000 Anglos and counting and that is about to get a lot worse as Quebec's birth rate falls right over a cliff. Many, many factors and factions will not allow Quebec to get any more sovereign than they are now.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1332
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:54 pm
 


Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:
Well, unlike Scotland, Quebec is right at the heartland center of this continent and it is by no means certain how our southern neighbour will react to having their northern coastline on the Great Lakes come under the control of a possibly hostile country. There are many other complications, like a French Quebec that is surrounded by native nations who have bigger, better and older claims to the same land that the Quebecois want to take out of Canada. The U.N. may end up adjudicating on whether Quebec is any more than 100 miles wide. This will be a very complicated process regardless of how TROC reacts and the Quebecois have been lying to each other about sovereignty. The Scots may be about to pull it off but their situation is entirely different. They are surrounded by countries just like theirs ... Denmark, Norway, Iceland and Quebec is surrounded by 330,000,000 Anglos and counting and that is about to get a lot worse as Quebec's birth rate falls right over a cliff. Many, many factors and factions will not allow Quebec to get any more sovereign than they are now.


Maybe, but with the sentiment in other parts of Canada that Quebec ought to leave Confederation, with Martin pointing out how much higher it apparently is than it was even just after 1995, that might, God forbid, be enough to tip the balance. People were declaring the issue dead in 1984, and Trudeau himself was declaring it dead back in 1975.

The Quebecois are not the only ones lying to themselves about sovereignty, of course-anybody who thinks that the rest of the country would benefit by Quebec's departure is fooling themselves just as much, as I've shown elsewhere.

However, Quebecers are hardly the only ones who have contemplated separatism despite it being apparently unthinkable. Remember Roy Romanow's admission about Saskatchewan also contemplating secession if Quebec left in 1995? Or how, according to his Wikipedia page, Ezra Levant not only supported Quebec separatism in 1995 but also said in 1996 that Alberta should contemplate separating if the federal Liberals were re-elected?

Reason shows that Quebec, and Canada as a whole, is far better off if the country stays united. However, especially fervent emotion can lead to things happening that reason alone suggests would never occur.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 6:03 pm
 


Canada might easily fracture into three or four pieces. Even Saskatchewan considered separation during the last referendum. I guess that it was because of the UNFOGIVEABLE OUTRAGES committed against Saskatchewan by Canada, I guess.

I really don't like living in a nation of whiny victims. Just how far up your asshole can you bury your head, anyway?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  1  2  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 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.