Anglo-Canadians' are terrified of the Bloc

What are people's thoughts on this under-analysed current in the new coalition craze?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The CPC play this to the francophobe population - which just happens to be one of their supporting social groups. But, then, who ever accused them of  being open-minded progressives?

 

I don't think the problem with the Bloc is that they are separatist - it's that they are solely and entirely concerned with Quebec.  They want what's best for Quebec; if that is what is best with ROC then that's fantastic, but if not, the interests of Quebec outweigh the interests of the ROC.  While people say that other parties are regional (Libs - Toronto; Cons - West); the Bloc is the only party that actually has this as part of their platform.  From their website:

 

Introduction

Chapitre 1- Défendre les droits du Québec

Chapitre 2- Présenter et défendre l'identité québécoise

Chapitre 3- Le développement durable du Québec

Chapitre 4- Défendre les intérêts du Québec

Chapitre 5- Défendre les intérêts des Québécois et des Québécoises

Chapitre 6- Défendre les valeurs et les points de vue du Québec

 

Right now the issue of separation is not in Quebec's best interests, so it's taken a back seat.  But it will be back at some point and in the meantime the Bloc continues to advocate for Quebec without regard for the rest of Canada.   And I don't fault the Bloc for doing it.  Its mandate is to defend Quebec's rights and interests etc.

 Politicians pander to Quebec all the time.  Harper (and Ignatieff) with his whole Quebec as a Nation thing; resolving the fiscal imbalance; huge equalization payments...  People are worried that with the Bloc holding the balance of power over the coalition, more concessions will come at the expense of the other provinces.  I don't think anyone is seriously concerned that a coalition is going to open the door to separation.  The issue is how stable a coaltion is which is supported by a party that doesn't give a fig about 9 provinces and 3 territories.

 

Jesus Murphy! The Cons in Question Period today are raising the Separatist boogyman over and over. Harper has no shame. He has to go!

Quote:

Right now the issue of separation is not in Quebec's best interests

Says who?

Quote:

The issue is how stable a coaltion is which is supported by a party that doesn't give a fig about 9 provinces and 3 territories.

The Bloc currently have 49 MPs in the House of Commons and like it or lump it have as much right as any group of MPs in the House to supply confidence and engage in bargaining over policy matters.

They are also a progressive party, and while they do not care about the affairs of British Columbians or Nova Scotians, they have been standing up for the interests of working class Canadians in their short 18 year life far more than the Liberals and Tories have done in their entire histories.

They have also already committed to supporting the coalition until June 2010 and were willing to support it until 2011 if the NDP and Liberals had conceded on some more Quebec-based issues.

It is very telling that a coalition involving a separatist party will likely better govern the whole country during the 40th parliament than Harper and his merry band of know-nothings.

Funny thing in all of this nonsense by the CPC against the Bloc and PQ, is that it is really going to shoot them in the foot regarding their chances of keeping the seats they have in PQ, and indeed getting more, and thus their thoughts of a majority are going to slip further away.

They can't get more seats in AB and SK. Well maybe 2 if Duncan and Goodale go, but that is it. People in BC that I know, are not afraid of the Bloc, nor any notion of "separatists".  In fact, lots of people I know would vote Duceppe in heartbeat if the Bloc was a national party and feel more comfortable  that the coalition has the Bloc as part of it.

Face it, if Canada is doing bad, so will Quebec. Thus it becomes a priority of Duceppe's to insure Canada does well.

___________________________________________________________

"watching the tide roll away"

"Thus it becomes a priority of Duceppe's to insure Canada does well." Exactly the feeling expressed by almost all French-speaking Quebeckers on open-line radio programs... except for the Harper 'bots - mouthing packaged lines from http://mycampaign.ca - who try to present themselves as ultra-sovereignists denouncing "Traitor" Duceppe.

More fun than a barrel of monkeys.

remind wrote:

Face it, if Canada is doing bad, so will Quebec. Thus it becomes a priority of Duceppe's to insure Canada does well.

 

I completely agree.  And I think for the first couple of months everything will go fine. 

My concern is that, while everyone agrees that something needs to be done about our (global) financial crisis, not everyone agrees on what should be done.  Couple this with the fact that I have very little faith in any politician to put partisan politics aside and focus on what's good for the country instead of what's good for his party (yes, his). 

 People are already upset that the NDP has agreed on the corporate tax issue.  Each party is going to have to make concessions at some point which will further alienate many in each party's base (except of course, the Conservatives who will come out of this stronger than ever since they won't be responsible for anything that the coalition does.  When the economy goes further south, the cons will be able to say "see, you should have stuck with us").

 

I have actually worked with Bloc members on some agriculture issues.  I found them quite serious about their committment as MPs to act in the best interests of citizens.  True their main focus is Quebec, but does anyone really think that the Conservative MP from Ashwhipe-Nosehonk in Alberta thinks about the best interests of the people of my riding in Ontario very much, or a single riding in Quebec.  I highly doubt it.

 

I find this whole line about 'seperatists' highly anti-democratic- as they were duly elected by Canadian citizens and extremely self-serving since we all know Harper remained in power in year one of his government through support of the Bloc.

Harper "said yesterday the Coalition leaders did not have a Canadian flag
behind them when they signed - bullshit - there were TWO Canadian flags
behind them!"

 But were they wearing Canadan flag boxer shorts?

By that notion, Dion is if anything far more ingenuous. The Liberals ran ads before warning that Harper would work with the Bloc. Dion's academic work on Quebec, and intellectual argument behind his opposition to the fiscal disequlibrium arguments is that by granting more powers to separatist governments, you increase the sense among the secessionist minority that they have the ability to run governments. Dion also argued in the campaign that he would not form a coalition with the NDP. 

Jack Layton has acted honourably, if, I think unwisely in all this. Dion is a powerhungry cad whose reputation for honesty is more a function of his utter incompetence.  

 

 

Is anyone bothered by how anti-sex is the use of the "in bed with" metaphor to denounce agreements between parties one would rather see at odds? Closet Puritans... who'd a thunk it?

Anglo-Canadians aren't "terrified." Every election there's plenty of noise and some polls that indicate a good number outside Quebec would consider voting BQ if given the chance. What's happening now is Harper is in full  desperation mode, slinging "seperatist" and "socialist" around like his political life dependend on it. Which it does.

 I agree with much of what has been written.

The Bloq's mandate is essentially to represent the interests of Quebec until such time as the PQ can garner a vote on separation.

They cannot in any way force separation from the House of Commons and that is not part of their plan.

Yelling SEPARATIST will only piss off quebeckers.

BA is right that they are good MPs who have a focus on Quebec as that is their constituency just as Reform/Alliance represented Alberta. 

They see how dangerous Harper is just as much as the rest of us.

 

[i][b]Brian Topp[/b]: Our friends on the blue team seem to mostly focus on sticks, and not so much on carrots. ;)[/i]

Go to hell Unionist

 

 

 

 

 

 

There does that make you feel better

Summer wrote:

My concern is that, while everyone agrees that something needs to be done about our (global) financial crisis, not everyone agrees on what should be done.  Couple this with the fact that I have very little faith in any politician to put partisan politics aside and focus on what's good for the country instead of what's good for his party (yes, his).

My concern is that similar to that of yours, not everyone is agreeing. But I do believe some know what needs to be done. And I do believe that Duceppe and Layton will put partisan politics aside, and do what is correct for the good of Canada. Or what is in their power to do. If a strong non-partisan plan works, it will be of partisan benefit. Each party will wear the success, just as they would any failure.

I have no faith that Harper would do anything for the good of Canada, or even for his party for that matter. He is a one man show, and it is all about him. Canadians did not elect a dictator. Canadians do not want a dictator. The Dictator now has no shoes.

Moreover, given the current CPC infighting and the rise of Prentice and Baird for CPC leader campaigns, I would say that Harper does not even enjoy the confidence of his party, a fact that has gone unnoticed for the most part by the media, and by others here, let alone having the confidence of the rest of the House. And that fact, to me, says even more that Harper has to be gone.

Even a short term coalition would make that happen. The coalition is not going to be any worse for our economy than the CPC is going to be. In fact, they have a good shot at being better for the economy. And for making Canada a better place while doing it, instead of a worse place, under CPC dictates.

Quote:

People are already upset that the NDP has agreed on the corporate tax issue.

Then they are short sighted.

Quote:

Each party is going to have to make concessions at some point which will further alienate many in each party's base

They would have to make bigger concessions, were they not in power. Would people be alienated because every concession was having to be made?  Of course not! So why would they be alienated when just "some" have to be, instead of every?

When things are gained, even if other concessions happen, then that would be still more that what would be possible under a Harper dictatorship, or even under a Liberal minority/majority, as the Cons would support them in a minority situation, if it screwed over the working class. And again, people who do not realize this simple fact, are short sighted. So, if they choose to be alientated because of their being short sighted...well...then they are throwing away a gift of a type that has not come along for 40 years.

Quote:

(except of course, the Conservatives who will come out of this stronger than ever since they won't be responsible for anything that the coalition does.  When the economy goes further south, the cons will be able to say "see, you should have stuck with us").

No reason to believe the Conservatives will come out of this stronger. In fact they could come out of this an even bigger loser. Moreover, if the economy gets better, they would have said they did it, and their majority would have happened. 

The cup is now half full, it is no longer half empty.

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

This will end up coming back at him when the clown boy has to defend his PM position - again. The people of Quebec who voted Bloc will not be happy about how they are being described by this asshole.

Anyone have some Tide? I really think this stain on Canada needs a strong remover. 

 

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Go to hell Unionist

Thanks, BA, I needed that!

Now, back to the love-in.

Stargazer wrote:

Anyone have some Tide? I really think this stain on Canada needs a strong remover. 

 

This is just the analogy we need. This isn't about ushering in socialism or democracy or utopia or peace or solving the economic crisis. It's about throwing some arrogant bastard out of your house when he has just gone beyond any civilized norms. And it's about everyone feeling great that they can do it together.

That is absolutely good enough for me. A little victory, something to build on. It's a little bit like the Obama thing (though I don't want to stretch the analogy). People felt great; they still do. But there must be no illusions.  To describe it as a defeat, or a fraud, or as a danger not worth the risk, is to be unable to distinguish between movement and paralysis.

Go with the Tide! Out, out damned spot!

Thank you as always, Stargazer.

what if Harper actually Does want to divide up the country, along the lines of Security and Prosperity Partnership regions, and irritating people in Quebec is a key goal here for him, as Wilf hinted at above.?

Harper seems to be very good at inflaming his own constituents' worst emotions, and those of others as well. 

Does anyone recall that the Bloc was formed by a Conservative cabinet minister, Lucien Bouchard, who, himslef, was a separatist recruited by Mulroney (along with others)?

Does anyone recall that Stephen Harper was a Western separatist (build a firewall around Alberta)?

It seems if anyone is afraid of separatists the Cons are not the party to support. 

agreed, remind.

LeighT wrote:

what if Harper actually Does want to divide up the country, along the
lines of Security and Prosperity Partnership regions, and irritating
people in Quebec is a key goal here for him, as Wilf hinted at above.?  Harper seems to be very good at inflaming his own constituents' worst emotions, and those of others as well.

Well then, LeighT, won't some Canadians be the fools for wanting Harper to stay in power, or to be anywhere near the government, if they are against any separation movement. Or even more the fool for voting for him! They have no one else to blame other than themselves, the 37.7% who voted for him, I am speaking about here, plus those who see the cooperation between the majority MP's, as being wrong. And people are just as foolish for buying into a notion of a leader being it all, and other pure party politics that serve no purpose in a crisis situation, as opposed to supporting representative parliamental democracy, the system which Canada has.

This cooperative government is the face of the reality of proportional representation, if it would be implimented in Canada. If we currently had a PR system this is what the resulting coalition government would have looked like, with an added GP component.

All the more reason for the majority cooperative government to commence immediately. It is time for people to realize we have had a MINORITY government in 3 successive elections, and things would be no different in a fourth, at a total cost of 1.2 billion dollars, and it is time for the MP's to work in cooperation, not in alienation into "otherness".

 

 

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

What else do people expect Duceppe to say? Especially just days before a Quebec election. Was he supposed to say "I hereby renounce any commitment to Quebec sovereignty - I love Canada"?