The Video that Killed Dion's Career

Stéphane Dion was recruited by Jean Chrétien to take a tough academic approach towards the separatists in the wake of RII. He was at his best when he countered the PQ's random utterances on separation, grounding his open letters in international law, convention, and political science. The separatists didn't listen to him, but he was speaking to the record.

He then drafted the next-to-useless "Clarity Act", which iterated principles of law and policy that were already well understood. It doesn't even bind a subsequent federal government. A future Prime Minister could still deal with RIII, if it comes, any way he or she wishes by simply repealing or ignoring Dion's statute.

There was never any constructive action from Dion; no reforms, no constitutional
proposals, no talks.

Just a lot of hot air.

Now Mr Dion has mishandled his greatest opportunity: a chance to defeat the Tories and form a coalition government. Ironically, Canadian unity was his downfall.

His mistake was simple: that silly video. No, not the out-of-focus A.V. guy video on December 2nd, but the "signing ceremony" on November 30th, where he shook hands with Layton and Duceppe, and signed an entente of some sort in front of the cameras.

The coalition was a good idea. Harper was feeling confident of his position and he started to do what he really does best, which is bite the head off kittens. He lost the confidence of the House in a stunning show of neo-con arrogance.

Dion did not learn from history, however, he tried to make it. History teaches us that the GG will ask after a non-confidence vote, and if you can satisfy her, you then get your chance to govern. That takes two phone calls, one to Layton and one to Duceppe. No signatures were necesary, just a plan and an opposition day in the Commons.

Instead we saw the former unity minister shake hands with the leader of the separatist party in Parliament in a ploy that would bring separatists semi-officially into the process of governing. The obvious conflict of interest inherent in the BQ, with its mandate to show that Canada cannot work, that it is not a real country, was overlooked. And practically, even with an entente, Duceppe would have called upon higher values and other separatist bullshit to bring down the coalition at a time and place of his choosing anyway.

Harper and the three or four front benchers he allows to speak in Parliament started to call it a separatist coalition, which it sure looked like. It may not have stuck if there was no signing ceremony, but it did. It could have just been an NDP-Liberal coalition with the BQ going along out of interest. But Dion wanted to look like a tough leader, and show Harper the writing on the wall.

He looked like a dork. It was the worst day in the Liberal Party's history, up there with 30 October, 1995, when they almost blew RII.

I will not miss Professor Dion. While I respect his service to the public as a politician, the country is no better off for his efforts. His obvious misjudgments should lead the Liberals to replace him over the holidays and get someone serious about leadership and better for Canadian unity. The new leader should work behind the scenes to make the coalition work, and give the GG an affirmative answer when she calls, without a signed deal with separatists.

Shop till the end of Canada!

Hey, now you can buy cool separatist gear at PQ.org's new boutique. Follow this link, and you can buy snazzy René Lévesque T-shirts, pins, and for $100 Canadian, an autographed poster of Pauline Marois!

Move over Jacques Parizeau poster (in my bedroom) -- you're so 1995, and Jacques wouldn't sign mine....even after showing up at his house and begging.

The Lévesque T-shirt (shown right) ships with the slight scent of Buckingham cigarette smoke.

Based on what research?

Wow. Canada's only officially bilingual province has decided to scrap early French as a Second Language (FSL) programs, including Early French Immersion. While parents are screaming they would like to have a choice in the matter, New Brunswick Education Minister Lamrock's new action plan, called When kids come first, follows close on the heals of a report representing a "comprehensive review" on FSL programs and services in the province, initiated by the Department of Education last year. Citing problems long acknowledged by researchers and practitioners of FSL across the country, (such as too few resources and qualified teachers as well as a lack of support for French Core programs by administrators, parents, and students) the province's response is an "interesting" one.

The authors of the report appear to base their eighteen recommendations primarily on andecdotal evidence rather than on a truly comprehensive review of the research literature. The fear that Early French Immersion is leaving students behind in reading and math is mentioned alongside the Financial Evaluation of FSL programs. Hmm, makes you wonder.

Given the fact that learning two languages does take time, it is only logical to expect proficiency levels in reading somewhat later than for monolingual children. A good chunk of the Canadian population currently raising bilingual or trilingual children can attest to this without the wringing of hands. The increasingly common misconceptions that our children need to be literate before they even enter kindergarten seems to be at odds with bilingualism. And given the fact that French is hardly valued at the post-secondary level at Canadian universities it is no wonder that high school are opting out of official bilingualism programs.

A more appropriate recommendation might have been to bring in Intensive French in earlier grades to replace some of the ailing Core French programs perhaps, while leaving motivated parents to decide if they want to take on the challenge of a bilingual education for their children by continuing Early French Immersion. It seems money is doing the talking here, more than anything else. Let's hope it doesn't set a precedent.

meike at uni.ca

Thoughts on Federalism

(Extracts and edited)

Several federations have become centralized, as there is no universal practice in this regard. United States America and Australia have started enjoying centralized practices due to modern media technology and the pressure of globalization. However, countries like Canada, India and Switzerland are in the decentralized system of governance. The federal system is not a magic stick to settle all sorts of conflict, corruption and other bad aspects of democratic system.

There are certain conditions to be met while talking about the successful federal system of governance. The federal system of governance can work smoothly when it strictly follows certain democratic norms rule of law, respect for cultures amongst the different groups, and honouring some important elements of common identity. The federal structure can function effectively in such a society where rule of law and independent judiciary is honoured.

“The Government of Canada has been pursuing a more open federalism that recognizes the strength and contribution of each region of this country." Stepen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada

Constitution of Quebec

Daniel Turp has always taken a lawyer's view of Quebec separation. Unfortunately for him international law isn't in his favour. Now he turns to Constitutional law, a more fertile area. Bill 196 is his draft Constitution (shown here in English and here in French).

I have always considered this more dangerous to Canadian unity, since it enunciates ideas that are the underpinnings of separation. The principles in the document are much easier apple pie to sell to Quebecers than political science-centred federalism.

I will continue to monitor Turp, as I have for over a decade, to see if he's finally putting his political life to some productive use.

graham at uni.ca

Comparison between Kosovo and Québec

Canada, Kosovo, and the myth of Happy Hostage Unity


The United Kingdom, Australia, France, The United States, Turkey, Senegal, Albania, Afghanistan and Costa Rica have already formally recognized the Republic of Kosovo as an independent country. Some two dozen more countries will likely follow their lead by the end of the month. Canada's not on the list - yet.

Some say it's at least partially about Quebec for us. This analysis on Reuters by David Ljuggren puts it this way: "Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia is a headache for Canada, which needs to find a way of recognizing the new state without boosting the fortunes of separatists in its French-speaking province of Quebec. . ."

Fair enough. Some in Canada put it less mildly and betray some more troubling biases and assumptions: "'. . Canada is boxed in,' Alain Gagnon of the Universite du Quebec in Montreal told AFP. If Canada 'quickly recognizes Kosovo independence,' it may be obliged to accept Quebec independence if separatists ever succeed in holding another plebiscite and win, he explained. . ."
Whether or not our current federal government, a government that has shown the way foreward with more flexible federalism, buys into the assumptions underlying these statements is beside the point; They are still probably considering the mood of Canadians on this matter. Some of the radio call-in shows have seen calls once again showing fear that there'd be a circumstance where Canada might have to "let" or "allow" Quebec to leave the federation.

Think about those words . . . 'accept,' 'let,' 'allow' . . . . now think about the assumptions there. The future of one of the jurisdictions that federated to make this country is apparently, in the eyes of many Canadians, in the hands of anyone but the people of that jurisdiction. How far are we willing to carry this?

I'll put it another way. Imagine a post-"oui" vote Canada wherein Canada didn't "let" Quebec leave. Besides accommodation of childish spite, what would be accomplished here? What would the economy look like? The state of civil unrest? The way we are viewed internationally?
The daft, arrogant and rigid top-down federalism of Trudeau, Chretien and Dion had its chance. Far from saving Canada, this rigidity only further polarized this country. Ottawa governments taking this line got sovereignty referendums in 1980 and 1995 for their efforts. Secession references and the now-outed post-oui contingency plans did nothing except show that we need a new approach, or a return to more respect-based principles in our federalism.

The fact of the matter is - you can't legislate unity; You can't lawyer your way to unity; You can't, without severe scarring and human cost, coerce nations within a country to stay unified. Unity in free and democratic countries and federations has to be earned. It has to be worth it. It can't be a unity of state-sized hostage taking. Moreover, if democratic mechanisms lead to a decision we may not like, we can't take our toys and pretend as if it didn't happen. Ask the Chechans what happens when a country behaves in such a way.

I am a Newfoundlander. The people of the Dominion of Newfoundland voted by a very narrow margin to join Canada. If it was enough to snuff out the country in which my grandparents were born, then a similar fair process is bloody well enough to establish independence.
Some otherwise very pro-freedom and pro-democracy people get very uptight when talk turns this way. The possibility of change frightens them. They forget that the world is not static. There is no reason to try to grab on and freeze the globe and prevent the changing of maplines after some arbitrarily picked point in our timeline. They have always changed. If we want ours in this country to stay the same, pretending as if other nations and countries do not exist will not achieve the desired effect, it will only show us to be slightly more inconsistent in our approach to such matters.

Putting aside the fact that most academics agree that a comparison between Kosovo and Quebec is a comparison between apples and oranges, Canadians need to grow up when it comes to how they let the issue of the potential for Quebec to become independent affect them. Please don't tell me that this country is so close to death's door that the only viable tools for unity remaining open to us are semantics, lawyering, or possibly coercion . . .

It is precisely because we're big and mature enough to make this federation workable and united with strong provinces and more of the new flexible federalism that we should be among the first to confidently recognize Kosovo. Besides, it's the right thing to do.

Posted by Liam O'Brien on February 19, 2008 Permalink

Talk about minorities and the need for respect!

Unbelievable - we haven't learned a thing! According to some of the victims' families who were recently contacted by B.C. Victim Services, the second Pickton trial is reportedly not going to happen.

This discussion was under way last December, the minute Pickton was convicted of 6 counts of second degree murder in the first trial. It was being talked about at the water coolers, in the change rooms of rec centres, over dinners with friends - should there be another trial for the remaining 20 victims? "It would cost way too much. The Olympics are coming and all." "Think about it, 20 women. That'll take years and years." "Yes, and oh my gosh, I just can't take anymore of these stories in the media. Don't have the stomach for it. I have had enough of the radio and television reports, and the pictures in the newspapers..."

Nice! What we are in fact saying is that those 20 women have no worth as human beings. Their stories don't need to be told because it would cost money and would inconvenience our cozy little lives. The fact is, we as a society are also to blame for the deaths of these women by being part of a community of residents who for the most part, doesn't give a rat's ass about what goes on in the Downtown Eastside and doesn't care why these women were driven into the sex trade. The 20 women still waiting for their day in court gave their lives in a most horrible way. The least we can do is offer some taxpayers' money and our respect. This is, first and foremost, about taking responsibility for what happens in our communities.

So for my part, I am ready to see that money spent, ready to explain to my children what the pictures in the morning paper mean. And I won't turn the radio dial even when my stomach feels sick from listening to what the women who died had to endure. How about you?

meike at uni.ca

Le Bilinguisme, une richesse.

Les francophones ne se mettront pas à parler anglais entre eux parce qu’ils sont bilingues.

Selon Pierre Calvé, Doyen de 1994 à 1997 et auteur et professeur – département de linguistique et faculté d’éducation de l’Université d’Ottawa de 1969 à 2001

Extrait


… Voici donc quelques faits qui devraient aider à remettre certaines pendules à l’heure.

Apprendre à communiquer efficacement dans une langue seconde, en plus de procurer d’évidents avantages sur le plan utilitaire, comporte de nombreux bénéfices sur le plan du développement cognitif, social et affectif.

… Ceux qui ont la chance de maîtriser deux langues aussi prestigieuses et utiles que le français et l’anglais font l’envie du reste de l’humanité.

Laisser entendre qu’on ne devrait pas « trop » enseigner l’anglais afin d’éviter que tous les Québécois ne deviennent bilingues et finissent par abandonner leur langue maternelle est une aberration. On ne cesse pas de marcher parce qu’on apprend à nager. . .

Publié dans La Presse le 19 février 2008

Voir également "Les Canadiens et le bilinguisme au Canada" de la Presse Canadienne - sondage Léger.

Kosovo

A warning to Quebec separatists who use Kosovo as inspiration for a Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) : not so fast. Kosovo's UDI is gaining legitimacy -- slowly -- due to an exception in international law related to the treatment of minorities. Indeed, in that region, genocide and other atrocities by Milosovic and others created this exceptional fount of legitimacy.
Quebec would have no similar claim. I am sure the usual suspects will use this false analogy (I am going to check vigile.net right now to confirm...) but I have never accused them of being rigourous or using correct international law analysis to begin with.

graham at uni dot ca

“Britannica rules”

Phil,

I just finished reading Richard Gwyn's excellent biography of Sir John Eh MacDonald and your sentiments are exactly those of Georges-Étienne Cartier and the other Canadiens who supported Confederation. Federalism provided Canadiens with the kind of protection needed for the French language to survive in North America.

Great book by the way.

David at uni dot ca


-----Original Message-----

Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:28:45

As a francophone, I thank God that in the end, Great Britain won on the Plains of Abraham because I am convinced that the British were far more flexible to accommodate the French than the French would have been towards the English. As a Nation, we were able to develop so much more with Britain... so I also share the sentiment that as far as our Federation is concerned, "Britannica rules”. This is not taking away my pride as a Francophone, it's simply a logical conclusion. I am not French... I am a multicultural bilingual French-Canadian. Huge difference!

Phil at uni dot ca

On Federalism by P.E. Trudeau - quote

"Reason over passion."

Faiblesse de l'enseignement de l'anglais

Entrevue au Devoir - Marois veut des élèves bilingues

Robert Dutrisac
Édition du mardi 05 février 2008


La faiblesse de l'enseignement de l'anglais dans le réseau public pousse des élèves vers les cégeps anglophones, dit la chef péquiste

La chef du Parti Québécois (PQ), Pauline Marois, croit que tous les Québécois devraient être bilingues en sortant de l'école secondaire ou du cégep, ce qui est loin d'être le cas pour les enfants qui fréquentent le réseau public en français.

«Le vrai défi qu'on a, c'est que nos enfants sortent de l'école bilingues», a déclaré Pauline Marois lors d'une rencontre éditoriale avec l'équipe du Devoir.

Selon la chef péquiste, la faiblesse de l'enseignement de l'anglais langue seconde dans le réseau des écoles publiques pousse des élèves francophones à fréquenter le cégep en anglais. «Pourquoi pensez-vous qu'ils vont dans des cégeps anglophones dans certains cas? C'est parce qu'ils ne possèdent pas bien la deuxième langue. C'est une façon pour eux de l'apprendre», a-t-elle fait observer.

Pauline Marois a cité l'exemple de ses propres enfants qui ont fréquenté l'école publique. S'ils en sont sortis bilingues, c'est qu'il s'agissait d'une école francophone de l'ouest de l'île de Montréal. Ailleurs au Québec, la situation serait bien différente.

Il n'est pas question pour Mme Marois de donner son aval à une proposition qui refait surface dans les instances du PQ: interdire aux francophones ou aux enfants de la loi 101, ces allophones qui ont fréquenté l'école en français, l'accès aux cégeps anglophones.

Aux élèves qui ont fréquenté le réseau anglophone -- et qui ont souvent une connaissance du français bien supérieure à celle de l'anglais chez les élèves francophones, a-t-elle reconnu --, Mme Marois veut imposer un nouveau test. Elle propose que, pour obtenir leur diplôme de cégep, les étudiants anglophones réussissent un examen démontrant qu'ils ont «une connaissance parfaite du français».

Pauline Marois croit qu'«on glisse dangereusement vers l'anglais» à Montréal, pas seulement dans les petites boutiques, mais dans «le centre-ville financier». Le Québec doit «prendre un virage solidement et sérieusement» afin de franciser les petites entreprises et assurer l'intégration des immigrants «si on veut continuer à vivre en français ici en Amérique».

Afin d'assurer la francisation de tous les immigrants, Pauline Marois qu'il faut revenir à la formule des COFI (les Centres d'orientation et de formation des immigrants) que le gouvernement péquiste a abolis à la fin des années 90.

«Je crois que la formule des COFI, ce n'était pas si mauvais. Ce n'était pas si mauvais finalement d'avoir un lieu d'accueil où on apprenait l'histoire, la culture et les institutions» du Québec, a déclaré Pauline Marois.

C'est en 1998 que le ministre des Relations avec les citoyens et de l'Immigration, André Boisclair, a annoncé l'abolition des COFI, ces centres d'accueil pour les immigrants situés le plus souvent dans des quartiers francophones de Montréal, pour transférer leurs classes dans des écoles secondaires ou des cégeps. Le gouvernement jugeait que les COFI coûtaient trop cher et que trop d'immigrants en sortaient sans avoir achevé leur formation.

Selon Mme Marois, le Québec n'a d'autre choix que d'augmenter le nombre d'immigrants qu'il accueille afin de combler ses besoins en main-d'oeuvre. Dans cette optique, le PQ a appuyé le gouvernement Charest qui a décidé de hausser de 45 000 à 55 000 les seuils d'immigration au cours des trois prochaines années. Pour la chef péquiste, le manque de données sur l'intégration des immigrants, alors que le gouvernement garde pour lui des études depuis un an et demi, et le fait que plus du tiers des immigrants qui ne parlent le français à leur arrivée boudent les cours de français ne sont pas des raisons suffisantes pour renoncer à cette augmentation, comme le voudrait l'Action démocratique du Québec. «Il faut être très actifs. On ne peut pas penser que [l'intégration], ça va se faire tout seul», a-t-elle fait valoir.

Mme Marois est revenue sur sa volonté d'imposer un contrat d'intégration par lequel les nouveaux arrivants s'engageraient à apprendre le français, comme le formule son projet de loi sur l'identité québécoise déposé l'automne dernier. En outre, un gouvernement péquiste n'aurait pas les mêmes scrupules que le gouvernement Charest et favoriserait l'établissement des immigrants en régions.

Here we go again... refutation...

I am curious?

How could you take two different releases, and misquote the essential sentiment of each one?

First, AffiliationQuebec promotes Canadian values, and minority rights! There is NO anti French or anti Quebecois sentiment in our platform!

Journal de Montreal claimed Quebecers could NOT be served in French (Which is patently untrue), which their scandalous article failed to demonstrate.Their misleading, front page article, intended to inflame the social and political balance of Montreal, while acting as "agents provocateur".

If you cannot quote AffiliationQuebec correctly, please do NOT quote us at all!

Allen Nutik,
Chef,
AffiliationQuebec

Here we go again...

There is a new political party in Québec. It is called AffiliationQuebec and it has as it's main objective the promotion of the English Language in Montréal.

Fair game, I say. After all, this is a democratic Country and I am always happy to hear of efforts pertaining to minorities everywhere.

My only concern is the spirit that seems to envelop the Party’s Leader, Mr. Allen E. Nutik (see photo above). Yesterday, I received a letter from him indicating that the Charter of Rights is wrong: “Had we known the full implications of the massive changes the Charter of Rights would impose on Canadian life, I wonder if the results have been what the legislators originally intended?” The underlining issue here seems to be because the Charter protects the French Language.

Furthermore, Nutik exclaims: “I do want to talk to you for a moment about complicity, a word that certainly conjures up a negative connotation, especially when used in conjunction with Quebec's infamous language and sign laws, which I am not alone in considering to be illegal, although the Supreme court of Canada, in their wisdom, evidently does not. “

Mr. Nutik agrees that “Quebec law does permit the use of English on signs” yet, in another article received today, AffiliationQuebec has decided to file a complaint with the Quebec Press Council because Le Journal de Montréal has discovered a lack in French Services in downtown Montreal. You may read what this Party calls an “offending article” here:

The article is neither offending nor out of place. Francophones have the right to be served in their own language in the Metropolitan of Québec.

Thus the fight continues. Some appears to still want Montréal to become, if not a bilingual city, an Anglophone city and we have seen this in the past. In our view, the result of such actions simply nourish the Nationalistic sentiments of Quebecers and helps their "Independence" cause.

Time to wake up people. Québec has the right to be as French as Alberta has the right to be English.

Stop harassing francophones!

Jean Lessage (PLQ past Premier) was right: “Maître chez nous”.


phil at uni dot ca

No one cares... thus the end?

Hello graham at uni.ca,

No one is catching up simply because no one cares.

Think about it. In the last 40 years, each "substantive" Federalist cases have been rejected... mostly by EC.

Who are you expecting to excite with this. History repeats itself, and thus the danger of the disintegration of Canada.

Time to wake up.

phil at uni.ca