"Heads will roll...just watch me"

[notyoueither]

However, the real point is keeping Quebec, and the Cree, as happy parts of Canada. Not dealing with what would be a very messy situation should seperation ever win a vote.

Language rights are an ever present issue in various parts of Canada, and have been since the Conquest.

[Wezil]

Well.

Three pages now and still no defense of Mr Martin (although the political debate was entertaining it was somewhat OT for the thread).

Since no Liberal apparently wants to defend the man, how about telling me why you plan to vote for him anyway?

A lack of alternatives was mentioned earlier. To me, any party caught with both hands in the till CAN NOT be voted for. Any alternative seems better.

The poll says 39% of Cdns support the Liberals (still). So where are you all?

[Wezil]

btw Canadians - Mr Martin will be on Rex Murphy's radio program this afternoon (Sunday).

Two hours of calls from listeners. Desperation move? You bet.

[notyoueither]

Thanks, Wezil.

That should be good so I will look for it.

[joncha]

I think most people who vote Liberal do so because they view the alternative as being worse. The Liberals came to power as a vote against the Tories, and stayed in power to keep the Reform/Alliance out. For most people in Eastern and Central Canada, a corrupt centerist party is a lesser evil than a bigoted hard-right party. A re-founded right wing party has a chance, if it can distance itself from the worse aspects of its Reform heritage. As the Liberals move right under Martin, the NDP has a chance as moderates and disenchanted Liberals jump ship and, paradoxically, as the new Conservatives are seen as less of a hard-right threat.

The end result is Martin's Liberals are hemorraging on both sides of the political spectrum. The only thing holding them together is the dislike/distrust of the parties on either side.

jon.

[Wezil]

I agree with the analysis Joncha. Except for the no alternative angle. How much of YOUR money do they have to STEAL before the Liberals are put into the 'no alternative' category?

I'd like the party (if the convictions come through as expected) to be disbanded as a criminal organization/conspiracy. Liquidate the assets to repay the taxpayers and call the remainder punative damages.

Note - Rex's show will also be carried live on Newsworld (you Yanks can watch too)

[Odin]

at Canadian politics.

[FS*]

I'm not sure there's much to be said in defense of Martin. However, as has been said, who else is there, in any of the parties?

Oh, for a king! A leader of men... a fearless man of valor!

(Sit down, Svend.)

Do I hear laughter from the land of the ex-wrestler?

[Oncle Boris]

Since the thread has just bumped, I'd like to mention that the idea of Quebecois racism towards the Crees and Inuits is ridiculous.

First, I don't see why Native authorities wouldn't deal with a Quebecois Republic, if it promises to uphold the agreements concluded with the federal government.

Second, there is absolutely no evidence that an independant Quebec would not uphold those agreements.

Third, Bernard Landry (former separatist PM of Quebec) was perfectly aware of the delicate nature of the issue: that's why he was keen on offering very generous partnerships with the natives (esp. those in the north). In doing this, he's sending a clear message: you've got no interest in dealing with the federal anyway, because we'll be more generous than they have been.

Parizeau and Landry are clever guys. I think most people underestimate them.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Odin
at Canadian politics.

The constitutional disputes can get interesting, at times.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

The constitutional disputes can get interesting, at times.

I wish it was that interesting here. more interest would stop the voter apathy BS here, as would a PR system.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Odin


I wish it was that interesting here. more interest would stop the voter apathy BS here, as would a PR system.

At least, the stakes are important.

[cinch]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Since the thread has just bumped, I'd like to mention that the idea of Quebecois racism towards the Crees and Inuits is ridiculous.

Bulllllllllllllllllllshit.

The Natives signed a treaty with Canada/"The Crown", not Quebec. They are not toys of the French, to be used and moved about as the PQ wishes.

I'm not saying that all seperatists are anti-First-Nations, but I do think that the majority of them think of the Natives' concerns as secondary to their glorious revolution. I've seen too many separatists, when interviewed, say simply that the Natives "must come along" when the separation occurs. But that's just not good enough, I'm afraid.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by cinch

The Natives signed a treaty with Canada/"The Crown", not Quebec. They are not toys of the French, to be used and moved about as the PQ wishes.

And they are not toys of the federal neither. What they want is their rights to be recognized. They don't care much about who will be recognizing them, especially if the PQ shows willingness to discuss with them on good terms (BTW, the agreement concluded in 2003 is by far the most favorable one granted by a provincial government). Natives feel 'native', not Quebecois or Canadian. They aren't any more loyal to the crown than they would be to a Republic.

I'm not saying that all seperatists are anti-First-Nations, but I do think that the majority of them think of the Natives' concerns as secondary to their glorious revolution.

The separatist leaders know how delicate the issue is. You can't judge them from the herd's opinion.

I've seen too many separatists, when interviewed, say simply that the Natives "must come along" when the separation occurs. But that's just not good enough, I'm afraid.

As citizens of the Province of Quebec, I'm afraid they are subject to the authority of a referendum. I'm confident they can be convinced to come along willingly. They won't fight to be part of Canada, that's for sure. Maybe some kind of affiliation with Nunavut could be thought of.

The problem is, the land officially belongs to the 'State', who is in turn recognizing some ancestral rights to the natives- but the natives, themselves, are not part of the constitutional federation. They are forced to deal with whatever national entity will be holding the land they are cccupying. Quebec could even innovate on this, by recognizing the natives' rights in its new Constitution.

[joncha]

The national question is the key to understanding Canadian politics. From a Quebec point of view, Canada has two founding nations, french and english. Thus Quebec should get 50% of the pie. Most english canadians (especially "Westerners") view every province as being equal, meaning Quebec = Alberta and should get a 10% share of confederation. The result is an ugly compromise which neither side can accept, with Quebec generally recieving about one third (roughly matching its population).

Add to this mix the question of Native rights (which the courts have consistently upheld), and you begin to get an idea of the political dynamics.

Both the Bloc Quebecois and the Reform Party were creations of this conflict. The Bloc explicitly came together after the failure of the Charlottetown Accord, and Reform was an implicit reaction against both the spirit of Meech Lake and Charlottetown and against the increased Native militancy as symbolised by the military confrontation at Oka.

The "hardline" stance of Reform against these perceived threats attracted a disproportionate amount of bigots with other agendas (anti-gay, anti-immigration, etc.) to the party. The new Conservatives (and the Alliance before them) are still trying to shake that stink off as they become more and more mainstream.

For many on the left, the Liberals, although distasteful, provided a bulwark against the right wing. If 1993 election was about destroying the Progressive Conservatives (from all sides), 1997 was about keeping Reform out.

Canadian politics are only now shaking themselves out of the aftermath of the failed attempts of national reconciliation of the 1980s. From this point of view, the 2004/05 election should end up looking a lot like the 1988 election, but with the Liberals on top (and the Bloc with 20 or 30-odd seats).

The solution? Good question. The report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples that was struck after Oka called for a third house of parliament: a House of Nations. Add that to a triple-E senate and you've got the beginnings of a plan. But given the results of the last attempt at fixing the constitution, I doubt any politician would be willing to go near it any time in the next 20 years.

[/essay mode]

jon.

[FS*]

The solution? all the first nations get together, sue the pants off us in court, and reclaim the soil. English and French jointly wind up learning how to breathe underwater.

[Oncle Boris]

You guys forgot to talk about the Marijuana party. I'll be voting for them.

[Richelieu]

Originally posted by joncha
The national question is the key to understanding Canadian politics. From a Quebec point of view, Canada has two founding nations, french and english. Thus Quebec should get 50% of the pie.

I don't know what you're smoking, but it must be good stuff.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Richelieu


I don't know what you're smoking, but it must be good stuff.

Yeah... I must have hallucinated that whole referendum thing. The equality of nations idea is just a product of my imagination.

jon.

[Ben Kenobi]

The equality of nations

How many 'nations' are there in Quebec? I seem to remember them recognising 17. So by that logic, of equality of nations, the Quebecois should get 1/17 of the votes in Quebec.

Can't forget the nations that were here long before the Europeans.

[Ben Kenobi]

"It's not going to be a secret to people in Atlantic Canada that they don't feel very optimistic about their prospects and that's why children and grandchildren have been leaving that region for years," he said. "We're going to change that."

You have to look at Atlantic Canada as a whole, rather than just New Brunswick, or Nova Scotia. Population of Newfoundland is declining, with many young people leaving to go out west.

Secondly, so long as they are recipients of transfer payments, that is going to continue to rankle folks in the West and Ontario.

So, he wants people in Atlantic Canada to have jobs, and to have young people stay there. I don't see that as very provocative. Good for Stephen Harper.

[joncha]

I agree with you BK (did I really say that?). But one of the key Quebec Nationalist positions is that french canada and english canada were the founding nations of conferation, and thus Quebec should be on equal footing with the RoC.

First Nations have a similar argument, in that many (if not all) want to deal with the federal government on a nation-to-nation basis.

One of Chretien's strengths (and it's a typically Chretien weaselly strength) was his ability to play one off the other without actually conceding to either.

jon.


edit: cross-post... I was commenting on Ben's first comment, not the second one

[Ben Kenobi]

jon:

It makes no sense to divide the population of Canada into two nations, French and English. Over here in BC, I could easily list 10 different languages that are more prevalent than French.

I would argue that this diversity (we are one of the most diverse) would be better represented by Canadians first last and foremost, without making distinctions between French and English.

BTW- Quebec, only has 1/4 of the votes in Canada, so why should they be apportioned 50% of the votes?

We have gone beyond the confines of Confederation, and the system should represent Canada as it is, not the one it was.

[joncha]

BK: This is why the national movement in Quebec has the strength it does: if they were independent, they would get 100% of the votes.

It's not as simplistic as that either. In any federal system, balances are made to ensure democratic expression. The House of Commons is set up to ensure the equality of the individual (more or less). A "triple-e" senate is redundant because it would do basically the same. A senate based (loosely) on the American model would ensure the equality of provinces. The House of Nations idea could work to ensure that the founding nations of Canada (however they are defined) would have equality. One idea might be 1/3 English Canada, 1/3 Quebec, 1/3 First Nations.

I don't pretend to argue that this is necessarily a great idea. However, unless and until the majority of Quebecois feel comfortable with their place in Canada (and the rest of Canada accepts it!) we will continue to have the same problems come up again and again. The whole reason we're in this mess in the first place is because Trudeau forced his vision of Canada on Quebec, and Mulroney failed to fix it. Pretending it doesn't exist won't make it go away.

jon.

[Ben Kenobi]

is because Trudeau forced his vision of Canada on Quebec, and Mulroney failed to fix it. Pretending it doesn't exist won't make it go away.

I agree. However, Quebec needs to realise just how good they have it here in Canada, how much their language rights are respected and upheld. I cannot think of a minority that gets as much respect as the Quebecois do in Canada.

Put the question, but if they do not agree with the constitution, then Quebec has some hard decisions to make. Do they want to leave, or are they willing to compromise on the offerings given to them by Canada?

[joncha]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


I agree. However, Quebec needs to realise just how good they have it here in Canada, how much their language rights are respected and upheld. I cannot think of a minority that gets as much respect as the Quebecois do in Canada.

Put the question, but if they do not agree with the constitution, then Quebec has some hard decisions to make. Do they want to leave, or are they willing to compromise on the offerings given to them by Canada?

I agree with basically everything you say here. The point I'm making is that it's Quebec's choice to make, and that the terms of debate in Quebec, and thus their rationale for deciding, is very different than it is in English Canada.

jon.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Wezil
Well.

Three pages now and still no defense of Mr Martin (although the political debate was entertaining it was somewhat OT for the thread).

Since no Liberal apparently wants to defend the man, how about telling me why you plan to vote for him anyway?

A lack of alternatives was mentioned earlier. To me, any party caught with both hands in the till CAN NOT be voted for. Any alternative seems better.

The poll says 39% of Cdns support the Liberals (still). So where are you all?

Well, having listened to him this afternoon, it seems he will play several cards...

What happened was not something that Liberals in general approved of, and most Liberals would love nothing better than to see whoever is responsible in jail. He sited departmental internal audits that saw no criminal activity, but that found administrative problems which were supposedly addressed.

The problem is bigger than what happened in this instance. Corruption has happened before under governments of different parties. He is therefore going to argue that reform of the institutions is equally important to finding the culprits in this instance of the disease.

He did not know what was happening, and he had no power of enquiry to find out. The Finance Department does not oversee federal spending after allocation, the Treasury Board does.

He is commited to better government and fell out with the previous administration over issues of how things should be run. He does not want to bribe Quebec to be contented, he wants to build a country that Quebec (and other disenchanted regions) would be proud of and would want to remain part of.

He is going to campaign as the straight shooter who fell out with the 'bad old boys'. He is going to ask Canadians to entrust him with reforming our institutions with the goal of making such thefts less likely or harder to pull off in the future.

He is going to ask Canadians to believe.

[Ben Kenobi]

going to ask Canadians to believe.

So they just gotta have faith, eh? Faith in men?

[Asher]

Faith in homosexuality.

[Zylka]

He's playing it right for the press; for the time being

Good-bye Conservative Alliance crashing of the majority parliament. And after the elections, the west is f*cked once again.