In 17 days, all members of the PQ (Parti Québécois) will elect a new leader. André Boisclair (who you may have heard of by now, he was the subject of articles recently in the New York times) is still in the lead, but who knows what will happen when we get to the vote. There are 9 candidates, but only 4 of them have a legit chance of being the next leader.

After the new leader is crowned on the 15th, that leader will start right away with his (or her) plan to lead Québec to a PQ government next time around, and immediately after to a referendum.

New polls that came out today indicate that the Québec Liberals are in trouble. 69% of Québecers are not satisfied at all with the current government, while only 25% say they are satisfied. If an election was held today, the poll reveals that 47% would vote PQ, 30% would vote Liberal and 20% would vote ADQ. The ADQ is another party that believes in "autonomy", the only difference is that instead of seperating, they would want to be 100% in control of everything, but stay in Canada.

On the referendum question, 52% would vote YES if there was a refendum today.

The liberals are not gaining any ground despite the PQ not even having a leader right now. It could in part be because Charest is getting highly frustrated with the Federal government and people are realizing that there is no solution BUT the one we all know.

By "referendum" do you mean a separatist referendum?

yes, sorry.

Yes - that is what he is talking about.

Just hope it does not happen. The QB seem unable to accept good fortune; every time the residents of Quebec make a little bit of economic progress, they look for independence - every time they suffer an economic setback they cry to the Federal Government for relief. Things have been relatively good economically in Canada during the last few years (Imports down/ exports up - and even though they have around 6% official unemployment they are having a little bit of inflation from a hot economy; the TSX has gained by more than 50% over the past 5 years and the canadian dollar is trading around .85 US). All great economic news for most people - and better than the US over the same peiod.

The resulting economic upheaval and instability in a seperate Quebec would have thousands fleeing west or south from a devastated economy.

IMHO it would also lead to a seperate maratime confederation within 50 years or even less.

Think Lemmings.

R

ITjock: The seperatist movement is gaining ground not just here in Québec, but in many other provinces in Canada. If you think everything is going so well, open your eyes. Only 2 provinces presently put in more money than they receive from the feds, and those same feds are announcing billions in surplus every damn year. Surplus over surplus. Some provinces would be better off controlling all the money then make and how they want to spend it. The feds are inpieding on provincial jurisdiction in some areas and we've heard nothing more than scandal over scandal from the liberals in the past 10 years.

In addition to that, if you take Alberta in Québec, they are worlds apart.. not provinces apart, but worlds apart in every department (social issues most notably).

More and more eyes are opening, and this is why the separatist movement is gaining ground. Hey, 35000 new subscriptions to the PQ brought in by Boisclair, a lot of them youth. I say we're moving in the right direction.

[ October 28, 2005, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Leph75 ]

Gee - you have one group of provinces playing against another group over Federalism, Taxes, the Federal Government mandating Social Programs, and ... oh yeah language/religion. You have had a slight increase in the typically abysmal voting among younger voters. The economy is doing moderately well but people are still getting more discontented - and more conservative btw as they vainly try to protect their gains.

No - Nah - un unh - no way - I couldn't possibly recognise that happening anywhere else. Your situation is absolutely unique.

Yup - never seen anything like it before.

R

sarcasm or not, it's happening. It doesn't seem like your sarcasm or "interesting" comments are going to spark a big debate or exchange of ideas on here.
:cool:

Hmm, was the choice of November 15 for the PQ convention purely coincidental? I'm sure you (Leph) know the significance of that particular date in 1976.

These poll figures show that residents of La Belle Province are as divided as ever on the independence issue. But the numbers will surely vary depending on the exact wording of the referendum question. It needs to be clear and unambiguous, not the watered-down versions of 1980 and 1995. The federal Clarity Act, passed by the Chrétien administration a few years ago, will require this in any future referendum on secession in Québec or (heaven forbid) Alberta. And incidentally, despite the perceptions elsewhere, I certainly wouldn't go as far as saying that Alberta is 'worlds apart in every department' from Québec. Jean Charest and Ralph Klein are actually good friends.

This week marks the tenth anniversary of the last referendum and CBC did a piece on it tonight. One thing I found particularly interesting is the increase in support for Québec independence among immigrants to that province. In 1995 it was only 5% (remember Parizeau's infamous tirade against the 'ethnic vote') but that has increased substantially to 20% according to recent polls, and not just among French-speaking immigrants (predominantly from Haiti and Africa) but among 'allophones' as well (those whose mother tongue is neither French nor English)...the examples given were Spanish-speaking immigrants from Latin America. They still have a long way to go, but I guess that shows the PQ has had some success in winning over the 'ethnic vote'.

oh it will be. Every candidate has mentioned clearly that the question will leave no doubt in anyone's mind. Louis Bernard's question goes something like this: \"Do you want Québec to be its own country, yes or no\". But i think the lenght of the past questions was overrated as a reason the Yes side had so many votes. If anyone in 1995 didn't understand what they were voting for, then they clearly weren't paying attention or were livng under a rock. Everyone that voted YES or NO in 95 knew what they were voting for, and understood the question.

that tirade had validity. NO he wasn't saying that the reason the Yes side lost was because of people of other races, what he was saying was that a contributing factor was the ridiculous amount of immigrants that were given the right to vote in October 1995 (coincidence?). In that month alone, the number of accepted immigrants was like 10 times more than in other months.

UPDATE:

Tonight André Boisclair became the leader of the PQ. The openly gay 39 year old led a great campaign, with no personal attacks on other candidates (like some others did) and no negativity, but rather concentrated on positivity and confidence in the people. Tomorrow morning begins a new time for the PQ, where they will start their plan to:

1. win the next elections vs the liberals
2. win the next referendum

I believe both are very achievable.

The same thing can be said for the States. The Midwest has totally different values than Texas, Florida, California, NY, New England, etc...
Frankly South Florida has nothing in common with the rest of the state....is that enough reason to break up the US or the state of Florida? Doubt it.
Everything I've read has Quebec not having the economy to make it on their own. The Maritimes definately don't have the economy to make it alone. I don't see it working too well.

you've read totally wrong then, because Québec would do fine on their own.

Here is a document prepared this year called "finances d'un Québec Souverain". I apologize if it's in french, i haven't been able to find a translation as it's a HUGE document and i think that it was not translated.

Those numbers have NOT been disputed by anyone, including the feds.

http://www.pq.org/nv/tmp/finance_quebec.pdf

oh, and they've included pretty much everything in that.. including the Québec's part of the national debt.

[ November 16, 2005, 05:40 AM: Message edited by: Leph75 ]

MiamiSpartan, I don't claim to be an expert on Canadian politics, but I do know that the situation of Quebec is not analogous to "different values" in, say, Kansas and California. Quebec has a different language, culture, history, dominant religion. It is a nation within a nation. There is nothing really comparable in the U.S. If anything, it can be compared to Gaza or the West Bank (although the conflict has been a lot less bloody). Quebecois(e) people, like national minorities in the US, tend to have lower incomes, less education, more likely to die young, worse housing, and so on. So it's not just a difference in "values", which can and do change as population moves or people change their views.

Ms. de B is right. Perhaps Louisiana or New Mexico would be closer, though both are far more integrated into the US than Quebec is into the rest of Canada, whose federal system strikes me as a bit looser. Louisiana still uses completely different names for its counties, uses some Napoleonic law, and so on, but all US Constitutional law trumps its state laws, and most of its citizens speak English (or some version thereof) as their primary language. Actually thinking of it, the Native American sovereign tribal regions seem a bit closer to Quebec, though they're all far smaller and basically have no official say whatsoever in federal law, our Congress, etc. (That is, unless they're bankrolling crooks like Jack Abramoff....)

I agreed with some parts of your post, but disagreed on others.
First off, Québec is a nation within a nation, like you said. That's right. It is a french nation, with different values and a different culture. Religion was an important part of the past, but has practicly disappeared now. All you have to do is walk downtown in Montréal to see the large number of deserted churches. That's a good thing IMO.

The rest of your post was wrong though. Québec does not have lower incomes, less education, more likely to die young, worse housing, and so on.
All of those are wrong. Québec is doing fine, people are living well. The Maritimes would be classified as way poorer than Québec. After Alberta (clear #1) and Ontario and BC, i'd put Québec right up there.

There are many aboriginal nations in the north of Québec, and the PQ did negociate a treaty after the 95 referendum called "la Paix des Braves".

Well the new leader got the dog and houseplant votes.....a few irregularities in the phone voting apparently. Anyway its over now and a couple more years before the Premier has to call an election. Was listening to a few journalists and politicos and it sounds as if everyone knows of a few more skeletons in the new guys closet that will be saved for more appropriate times. Should be an interesting election when it happens, of course 2 yrs from now the bloom wil be off the rose and he wont really be the "new guy" any more.

Actually, the houseplant voted for the environment candidate.

I wish I could say I made that up, but it's true.

the irregularities were apparently very minor. They screen most of their members, but they do not have electoral lists for members who are 16 or 17 years old, so it's harder to screen. They admitted they couldn't check up on everyone that signed in as members and paid their memberships, but as the president of the party said, you have to have bad intentions to pull stunts like that. Obviously, it was journalists again.

As for Boisclair, today the liberals (both provincial and federal) attacked him and the party. Pierre Pettigrew (federal liberal) even went as far as calling all former PQ leaders "losers" and laughed at the party. Now i don't know what news you listen to or if you listen to call in shows on the radio or TV, but Québecers are not really finding the liberals very funny right now. If André Boisclair plays his cards like i think he will, and stays out of personal attacks, the liberals will continue looking like total fools and Québecers will all vote PQ. I can assure you of that. Already today, some Québecers are appalled at the Liberals' attacks.. and as Gilles Duceppe (leader of the bloc) said: "The liberals are really not in a position to talk right now".

Unless the liberals fire everyone and restart the party, there's no way they will pass in Québec in the upcoming federal elections, and no way in hell they will pass at the provincial elections, even if it's 2 years away. And after the PQ is in power, watch Duceppe, Bouchard, Landry and possibly even Dumont show their support for the YES side of the referendum.

There is an article about André Boisclair in the November issue of Outlooks; go to www.outlooks.ca and scroll past the hunks to page 33.

Boisclair's victory on Nov 15 (which was also the 29th anniversary of René Levesque's historic election win for the PQ) was no big surprise. While the cocaine issue may come back to haunt him too, I think his biggest challenge may come from hardline Pequistes, as he is perceived as being a bit soft on the sovereignty issue. And from what I've heard, he has ruffled a few feathers among Québec's labour unions (traditional supporters of the PQ), so he may have some fences to mend.

I completely disagree with the Québec-Palestine analogy. The Québec sovereignty movement has been very peaceful (apart from the brief FLQ crisis 35 years ago) and the standard of living enjoyed by les Québecois is light years ahead of the squalor in Gaza and the West Bank. It is also ahead of the Atlantic provinces, as Leph has indicated above.

Marc, Thank you very much for the article!

It pretty much describes the situation. Boisclair has now won the leadership, and even the hardliners in the party have vowed to rally to him. Marois (who was VERY disappointed of finishing 2nd and not getting as many votes as she hoped) has put her ego aside and has said that she will work with Boisclair.

On the show "tout le monde en parle" which is filmed on fridays and airs on sunday nights (and is VERY popular in Québec), she re-iterates that she will work with Boisclair and she puts an end to speculation that she might want to leave, she gets a big ovation from the crowd.

The goal of the party is bigger than it's members, which is what all candidates and activists have said since the vote. I don't think reconciliation will be a problem between them.

If Quebec separates, will the Montreal Canadiens have to change their name? wink

Yup.

To the Halifax Canadians

No name change needed if you consider the origin of Canadien. It was the name given to the settlers born in the colony of New France. (New France having the regions of Acadia, Canada and Louisiana). The "true Canadiens" are from here - maybe people from the rest of country should change their name.

More explanation found on a website:

It is interesting to note that, for at least a couple of decades after the British conquest of New France in 1759, the British conquerors of Canada reserved the term "Canadien" for the inhabitants of the former New France (often called les habitants). British authorities and settlers began to usurp the name after the Loyalist settlements in Upper Canada and the Atlantic Region were established during the 1780's. With the establishment of the Dominion of Canada by the British North America Act of 1867, the British North Americans began officially to call themselves "Canadians". Since then, the name has been freely given to any new settler from anywhere, and has come to mean "a citizen of the State of Canada". Only a half century ago, Canadiens in Québec and elsewhere in British North America still identified themselves rightfully as Canadiens.