Why Anglo media has it wrong on Quebec

mark_alfred wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

I suspect we're not going to hear any more from Trudeau about this issue.  I think they realize that it was a foolish move by Trudeau during the debate that has completely cratered their Quebec numbers.*

_____

* of course, I might be assuming too much here.  Their campaign has been all over the map, so who knows?

I was wrong on this.  Perhaps the Liberals have given up on Quebec and decided this nonsense will help them in Ontario.

Not at all. Trudeau definitely wants seats in Quebec and there is some overlap with the NDP but no sovereignist will ever vote Liberal. Non-sovereignist seniors, immigrants, anglophones and business people are his target demographics.

I think people outside Quebec think that Quebec is much more progressive than it actually is despite all evidence to the contrary.

re Sherbrooke Declaration,

response by Tom to Trudeau/Chretien blasts, in The Gazette today;

http://montrealgazette.com/news/national/former-prime-minister-paul-mart...

 I was out of the country and hence had not known the role of Craig Scott in this; looked him up, he is running in Toronto Danforth, still no clue. Anyone?

.................

In the first leaders’ debate, Trudeau and Mulcair sparred over the issue of whether a prime minister should enter negotiations to break up Canada if Quebec separatists win a referendum with a margin of 50 per cent plus one.

Mulcair said yes, and argues his plan is the most democratic way to prepare for such a possibility.

Trudeau, citing a 1998 Supreme Court of Canada ruling that led to the federal Clarity Act, said no.

He backs the court’s logic that separatists should only be allowed to win with a “clear majority” on a “clear” referendum question.

In an interview with the Citizen in early July, Mulcair defended his policy — saying that because the federal Clarity Act does not specify a percentage for what would constitute a clear majority victory, it is far from clear.

“I fought for Canada all my life and I was in the front row in Quebec City fighting the separatists,” said Mulcair.

“But what you have to know is that, at the end of the day, yes means yes. Because otherwise you’re playing a game. You’re almost inviting people in to express a yes that might mean ‘maybe’ or ‘let’s get a better deal.’ ”

In 2013, NDP MP Craig Scott introduced a private member’s bill co-drafted with Mulcair. The bill was not passed but it reveals how an NDP government would act: It would replace the Clarity Act and adopt the 50 per cent plus one threshold.

Key elements of the bill include: The referendum question must be clear; if the federal government doesn’t like the question, the matter must be sent to the Quebec Court of Appeal; and there must be no “irregularities” in areas such as spending limits and vote-counting.

swallow wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Non-sovereignist seniors, immigrants, anglophones and business people are his target demographics.

Which is itself proof he has no intention of winning very many Quebec seats - those demographics will net you about 10 seats. Wheras an attack on the NDP over "clarity" can win dozens of Onatrio seats, potentially, among the demographic of "Canada-first nationalists." 

Trudeau has defended the clarity act in Quebec since before he became leader and he has led in the polls since then. Sovereignists is the only demographic closed to him.