Quebec’s declining influence is good for Canada

[Colpy]

Lorne Gunter hits it on the head once again.....

And when a separatist Parti Quebecois government comes pounding on Ottawa’s door after the next provincial election, the Tories have the luxury, for once, of being able to try a little tough love rather than appeasement.
And Quebec can matter even less if the Tories revive Bill C-12 from the last Parliament. That was legislation that would have added 18 House of Commons seats in Ontario, seven in British Columbia and five in Alberta, to end the gross under-representation those provinces suffer in Parliament. Those 30 extra seats would shrink still further the influence of Quebec and its stagnant population.
Quebec need not be ignored or made irrelevant. Rather the Tories have the first chance in two generations to keep Quebec’s influence over federal politics at realistic levels, proportionate with that province’s share of the population. Let’s hope they take advantage of that opportunity.

read the article.....

Lorne Gunter: Quebec’s declining influence is good for Canada | Full Comment | National Post

This is one of the main reasons I voted Conservative, and one of the big reasons I am overjoyed they won.........the Quebecois tail has been wagging the Canadian dog for over 50 years.....it all stops here........

 

[Icarus27k]

I, I .... don't understand the issue. For the lack of a better term, it's too Canadian of an issue for me to grasp.

 

[captain morgan]

This is one of the main reasons I voted Conservative, and one of the big reasons I am overjoyed they won.........the Quebecois tail has been wagging the Canadian dog for over 50 years.....it all stops here........

I think it would serve all Canadians very well for Harper to adopt a policy of spreading any economic influence to regions specifically outside of Quebec... Much like Quebec has demanded advantages over these last 20 years, it's time to reward those regions that supported Harper

Ultimately, Quebec has been living in a fantasy land for 20 years and leveraging their position to the advantage of Quebec. I think it would send a very powerful message to the separatists (and the pop in Quebec in general) about their tenuous position in terms of going it alone.

 

[wulfie68]

I, I .... don't understand the issue. For the lack of a better term, it's too Canadian of an issue for me to grasp.

It basically amounts to the fact that Quebec has held a lot of power over the past 50 or so years because of the number of party leaders chosen from there. The article pointed out that no PM from outside Quebec has been elected to a majority gov't since 1958. It has translated into more concessions being made to the seperatists than might have been made by leaders from other parts of the country, who may have been a little more willing to call the province's bluff on seperation. Harper is a leader from outside Quebec (born/raised in Ontario, moved to and lives in Alberta) and his party only has 7 of its 167 MPs elected from Quebec, which means he needs to reward the other regions who supported him.

 

[ironsides]

Lorne Gunter hits it on the head once again.....



read the article.....

Lorne Gunter: Quebec’s declining influence is good for Canada | Full Comment | National Post

This is one of the main reasons I voted Conservative, and one of the big reasons I am overjoyed they won.........the Quebecois tail has been wagging the Canadian dog for over 50 years.....it all stops here........

Colpy, Why was Bill 101 was approved in 1977. That one little sentence I highlighted says it all. No state or Province should have laws above National laws. My question is why, did they have that much power?


"Officially, Canada is a bilingual country, which means that all governmental services have to be available in both official languages of the country. However, in the Province of Québec, the local, provincial law overrides the national law. Officially, Québec only has one language, and it is legally only required to offer governmental services in French. In practice, there are regions of Québec where many English speakers live, and English speakers who do not speak French are not left stranded every time they need official paperwork."

 

[Sparrow]

Colpy, Why was Bill 101 was approved in 1977. That one little sentence I highlighted says it all. No state or Province should have laws above National laws. My question is why, did they have that much power?

Do you have the faintest idea why Bill 101 was brought in and approved?????

 

[ironsides]

Colpy, Why was Bill 101 was approved in 1977. That one little sentence I highlighted says it all. No state or Province should have laws above National laws. My question is why, did they have that much power?

Do you have the faintest idea why Bill 101 was brought in and approved?????

Not the foggiest. My question is why make French a official language or any language official for that matter? I just think it tends to formulate a wrong form of nationalism.



I know the U.S. does not have a official language. English is just assumed to be the official language.

 

[Colpy]

Colpy, Why was Bill 101 was approved in 1977. That one little sentence I highlighted says it all. No state or Province should have laws above National laws. My question is why, did they have that much power?


"Officially, Canada is a bilingual country, which means that all governmental services have to be available in both official languages of the country. However, in the Province of Québec, the local, provincial law overrides the national law. Officially, Québec only has one language, and it is legally only required to offer governmental services in French. In practice, there are regions of Québec where many English speakers live, and English speakers who do not speak French are not left stranded every time they need official paperwork."

An absolutely perfect example of the tail wagging the dog.........

No political party that wished to gain power in Ottawa dared oppose Bill 101.

Quebec commands one quarter of the seats in Parliament, and Quebecers (somehow!) always manage to vote in a block (as just demonstrated so aptly) For years it was Liberal, then with Mulrooney all at once they switched to PC, then all in a mass to the BQ, and now as one, to the NDP. It is a complete mystery to me how this happens.....but it does.

For decades no party ruled in a majority without Quebec.......so no party dared confront Quebec.

The shocking part is that all provincial bills must be approved by the federal government before they become law, and the feds have the constitutional power to "disallow" any provincial legislation for any reason......and they approved Bill 101.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Not the foggiest. My question is why make French a official language or any language official for that matter? I just think it tends to formulate a wrong form of nationalism.



I know the U.S. does not have a official language. English is just assumed to be the official language.

The U.S. doesn't have an Official language? Weird....I know from a previous career
as a Safety Supervisor & Compliance Officer for an International Transportation
Company (OK...a Trucking Company), that a commercial driver in the U.S. can
be fined for not having a working ability of the English language.

It's somewhere in my U.S. D.O.T. F.M.C.S.A. handbook that I haven't had to look at
in about two years now. Ah, yes. 398.2 (c)4 Knowledge of English. Every driver
shall be able to read and speak the English language sufficiently to
understand highway traffic signs and signals and directions
given in English and to respond to official inquiries.

 

[Icarus27k]

Oh yeah. The United States doesn't have an official language on the federal level. Some states have official languages, but not the nation. I guess there's a difference between being able to read English language signs and an official language.

 

[cranky]

Hmmmmmm...."Every Redneck farmer in western canada
shall be able to read and speak the french language sufficiently to
understand the soup can labels in the grocery store whenever the snot nosed kid stocks the shelves incorrectly."

 

[Ron in Regina]

Oh yeah. The United States doesn't have an official language on the federal level. Some states have official languages, but not the nation. I guess there's a difference between being able to read English language signs and an official language.

United.States. D.O.T. Federal.M.C.S.A.

This a Fereral thing, not a State thing. If an Enforcement Officer stops
any Commercial Driver in the United States, that driver better be able
to communicate (understand and also respond) in English so that an
officer can understand them...or they're going to get fined. That's
pretty official.

 

[GreenFish66]

Quebec's influence is anything but in decline...They just broadened their spectrum...Canadian Politics just got very interesting ..( ok ..more interesting anyway )

 

[Icarus27k]

United.States. D.O.T. Federal.M.C.S.A.

This a Fereral thing, not a State thing. If an Enforcement Officer stops
any Commercial Driver in the United States, that driver better be able
to communicate (understand and also respond) in English so that an
officer can understand them...or they're going to get fined. That's
pretty official.

I believe that's regulations of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. It's not, like, a federal law passed by Congress.

 

[s_lone]

Colpy, Why was Bill 101 was approved in 1977. That one little sentence I highlighted says it all. No state or Province should have laws above National laws. My question is why, did they have that much power?

If somehow the federal had opposed Bill 101, Quebec would already be a country. It's as clear as that.

Bill 101 is not ''above'' any national law. It only applies in Quebec.

 

[Ron in Regina]

I believe that's regulations of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. It's not, like, a federal law passed by Congress.

That regulation is a law...and it's (......wait for it.....) federal.

Yes, FMCSA is exactly what you stated it is. It's a federal enforcement agency in the U.S.
under the jurisdiction of the D.O.T.

Does this mean the U.S. has an official language? I've no idea, but it sure walks like a Duck
& talks like a Duck...& I just googled this question...& yes, you are correct.

The U.S. doesn't have an official language.

 

[Colpy]

If somehow the federal had opposed Bill 101, Quebec would already be a country. It's as clear as that.

Bill 101 is not ''above'' any national law. It only applies in Quebec.

Ahhhh....the feds could have disallowed it........simple as that.

And Quebec will never leave as long as we have a reasonably strong man as PM.

Simple as that.

 

[s_lone]

Ahhhh....the feds could have disallowed it........simple as that.

Yes they could, but then Quebec would have separated.

 

[Bar Sinister]

Gunter might be jumping the gun. Let's look down the road a few years and theorize an NDP victory with Quebec once again sending 50 odd NDP candidates to Ottawa. What sort of influence would the province have then? Political parties that underestimate the importance of a province that contains 25% of Canada's voters have tended to pay a high price in past elections.

In the long run, however, I suspect Gunter might be right. Quebec's population relative to the rest of Canada is declining. In addition, the number of Allophones in the province is steadily increasing. Both trends will weaken Quebec's over-all influence as they make the threat of separation much less likely.

 

[ironsides]

Oh yeah. The United States doesn't have an official language on the federal level. Some states have official languages, but not the nation. I guess there's a difference between being able to read English language signs and an official language.

States don't have official languages either, what would happen if a state became 95% Spanish, French etc. no one will probably ever know what they would speak. (probably English because they all would have learned it by the time that happened.)

The U.S. doesn't have an Official language? Weird....I know from a previous career
as a Safety Supervisor & Compliance Officer for an International Transportation
Company (OK...a Trucking Company), that a commercial driver in the U.S. can
be fined for not having a working ability of the English language.

It's somewhere in my U.S. D.O.T. F.M.C.S.A. handbook that I haven't had to look at
in about two years now. Ah, yes. 398.2 (c)4 Knowledge of English. Every driver
shall be able to read and speak the English language sufficiently to
understand highway traffic signs and signals and directions
given in English and to respond to official inquiries.

It is not a government mandated language, but you have to pick one to be functional. (most signs and symbols are pretty much international) It would be ridiculous for all languages to be represented. Requiring some occupations to learn enough basic English to read traffic signs is just logical not to mention safe. Anyone who has a drivers license in North & South America can drive from one end to another with very little problem understanding street signs.