57

Harper doesn’t care about Quebec


 

At least, that’s the line you can expect from here on in from the Bloc Québecois, in light of Harper’s decision to fund Newfoundland and Labrador’s Lower Churchill falls project. (Also, Charest. Our preem just piped up on it, even though he said he’d stay out of the campaign. It’s old hat that Charest and Duceppe tend to form a coalition an odd kinship whenever an election rolls around…)

To be honest, I don’t think Harper cares. I wrote a piece about how the Conservatives will do no better than hang on to their existing seats in the province for this week’s mag; Newfoundland, with its oodles of oil money, is more fertile terrain than Quebec these days.

If I were cynical, I’d also say that a Conservative majority would suit the Bloc’s Gilles Duceppe’s fancy quite well, thank you. All the better to profess Quebec’s powerlessness in Canada, don’t you know.


 
Filed under:

Harper doesn’t care about Quebec

  1. Your cousin Pierre Duhamel at L'Actualité asks some pertientn questions:

    "Depuis quand le gouvernement fédéral subventionne-t-il des lignes de transport électrique ? C'est un joli précédent que serait en train de créer là Stephen Harper. Un précédent qui distortionne les règles du marché pourtant si chères aux conservateurs. L'électricité a un prix et on donnerait ainsi aux Terre-Neuviens un avantage compétitif face à l'électricité produite au Québec.

    Ottawa n'a pas à se mêler de cette affaire. Si Ottawa a la mauvaise idée de créer un programme d'aide aux lignes de transport électrique, assurons-nous au moins que toutes les provinces soient éligibles."

  2. Your cousin Pierre Duhamel at L'Actualité asks some pertientn questions:

    "Depuis quand le gouvernement fédéral subventionne-t-il des lignes de transport électrique ? C'est un joli précédent que serait en train de créer là Stephen Harper. Un précédent qui distortionne les règles du marché pourtant si chères aux conservateurs. L'électricité a un prix et on donnerait ainsi aux Terre-Neuviens un avantage compétitif face à l'électricité produite au Québec.

    Ottawa n'a pas à se mêler de cette affaire. Si Ottawa a la mauvaise idée de créer un programme d'aide aux lignes de transport électrique, assurons-nous au moins que toutes les provinces soient éligibles."

    • Yes, and when was the last time the federal government allocated $10 million for the construction of a provincial hospital?

  3. I guess Duceppe and Charest are not really about clean energy, unless they are the main beneficiaries.

    To the Blogger: Your title is ridiculous.

    It's a big country, and a PM of Canada has to care about all the provinces, all the regions.

    Whereas Charest doesn't anymore (once did) and Duceppe never will.

  4. I guess Duceppe and Charest are not really about clean energy, unless they are the main beneficiaries.

    To the Blogger: Your title is ridiculous.

    It's a big country, and a PM of Canada has to care about all the provinces, all the regions.

    Whereas Charest doesn't anymore (once did) and Duceppe never will.

  5. It is a pretty fresh angle to argue that Harper's going into Newfoundland for the oil.

  6. It is a pretty fresh angle to argue that Harper's going into Newfoundland for the oil.

  7. The Bloc have no role where there's a majority gov't, and one must note that the voters seemed to gradually notice. The party lost seats in the 1997 and 2001 election and seemed to be dwindling before the sponsorship scandal handed them a near-perfect issue to campaign on in Quebec. I submit they're likely to dwindle again if the result this time is a Tory majority.

  8. The Bloc have no role where there's a majority gov't, and one must note that the voters seemed to gradually notice. The party lost seats in the 1997 and 2001 election and seemed to be dwindling before the sponsorship scandal handed them a near-perfect issue to campaign on in Quebec. I submit they're likely to dwindle again if the result this time is a Tory majority.

    • To be sure, the PQ was in office in Quebec City during those elections as well. Even so, I do think you have a point. I wonder if that situation (Con majority in Ottawa, PQ in power) would improve Conservative fortunes in La Belle Province? I can see Harper asking for Quebec's federalists to all get behind him to defy separatists.

      • Of couse, if the campaign continues as it has, a Conservative majority will become rather theoretical.

  9. First of all, Mr. Patriquin, to even insert the word 'coalition' in jest, when referring to a working relationsship between Charest and Duceppe, only manages to confuse Canadians more about the true meaning of coalitions.

    No, it is not a coalition when two people with similar interest work together towards one similar goal; it's called being in sinc.

    If Canadians are prepared to let coalition governments be inclusive of our parliamentary system (and indeed coalition governments could be entirely democratic and legitimate even in Canada when considered evenhandedly), then the reporting on the meaning of coalitions better be informative, lest we, collectively as Canadians, really get lost in the woods.

    Would there have been a coalition government possible as signed on in 2008? Not really if one must count on the BQ's demand for standing up for Quebed and Quebec only. Why would a federation give over the balance of power to a provincial/separatist party, when all other provinces do not have such prominant seat at the federal table?

    Why do we have provincial governments? And why do we have a federal government? Because that's how it's supposed to work!

  10. First of all, Mr. Patriquin, to even insert the word 'coalition' in jest, when referring to a working relationsship between Charest and Duceppe, only manages to confuse Canadians more about the true meaning of coalitions.

    No, it is not a coalition when two people with similar interest work together towards one similar goal; it's called being in sinc.

    If Canadians are prepared to let coalition governments be inclusive of our parliamentary system (and indeed coalition governments could be entirely democratic and legitimate even in Canada when considered evenhandedly), then the reporting on the meaning of coalitions better be informative, lest we, collectively as Canadians, really get lost in the woods.

    Would there have been a coalition government possible as signed on in 2008? Not really if one must count on the BQ's demand for standing up for Quebed and Quebec only. Why would a federation give over the balance of power to a provincial/separatist party, when all other provinces do not have such prominant seat at the federal table?

    Why do we have provincial governments? And why do we have a federal government? Because that's how it's supposed to work!

    • Confuse Canadians more than they are about coalitions? How about the world? I heard a US newsman refer the Harper minority coalition government on tv. CONfusion.

      • My dear, the US newsman was confused, and may have or may not have confused you even more. Try to blame that on Harper? What ever beats your fancy.

        In any case, what do you, as a Canadian, think about the BQ being a coalition partner such as arranged in the 2008 agreement? That would be an interesting opinion to hear about. At least if the Canadians are clear on what the 2008 coalition stood for, then we could explain it properly to the American broadcasters as well. What do you think, should we give that a try?

        • BQ was not a coalition partner. They were prepared to support a Lib/NDP coalition in support of the common goal of helping Canada weather the recession that seemed to escape Harper's notice, It'sa as if they were in sinc with the Lib/NDP coalition.

          I agree that both Canadians and American broadcasters should be clear on what the Lib/NDP coalition stood for.

          • No, the BQ would only be in sinc when it will suit them.

            The BQ will only support a coalition government, such as the one proposed in 2008, if the BQ demands are incorporated. And the BQ was certainly not talking about demands regarding the stimulus package only, (although such demands would have 'provincially weighed too much in any case) Now, pleas, do tell, which other province has such opportunistic seat at the federal table? Tell me, which other province would that be?

          • You have anything other than your paranoid fantasies to back up that second paragraph?

    • Your attempts to remove any nuance from words will not go unchallenged.

  11. Confuse Canadians more than they are about coalitions? How about the world? I heard a US newsman refer the Harper minority coalition government on tv. CONfusion.

  12. Duceppe and Charest can cry me a river.

    Agree that Duceppe will spin this. Can't blame Harper for his new attitude – he has just poked along, doing what needed to be done in Quebec – just can't please them. I hope they don't get a dime in the ship building contracts and it all goes to Halifax and Vancouver.

  13. Yes, and when was the last time the federal government allocated $10 million for the construction of a provincial hospital?

  14. Duceppe and Charest can cry me a river.

    Agree that Duceppe will spin this. Can't blame Harper for his new attitude – he has just poked along, doing what needed to be done in Quebec – just can't please them. I hope they don't get a dime in the ship building contracts and it all goes to Halifax and Vancouver.

  15. My dear, the US newsman was confused, and may have or may not have confused you even more. Try to blame that on Harper? What ever beats your fancy.

    In any case, what do you, as a Canadian, think about the BQ being a coalition partner such as arranged in the 2008 agreement? That would be an interesting opinion to hear about. At least if the Canadians are clear on what the 2008 coalition stood for, then we could explain it properly to the American broadcasters as well. What do you think, should we give that a try?

  16. What absolute nonsense. The federal government is consistently involved in supporting major infrastructure projects across Canada. I lived most of my life in Quebec without ever having to scour newspapers for evidence that the feds had helped another region and bawling that it must mean they love me less.

  17. What absolute nonsense. The federal government is consistently involved in supporting major infrastructure projects across Canada. I lived most of my life in Quebec without ever having to scour newspapers for evidence that the feds had helped another region and bawling that it must mean they love me less.

    • Well Dave, that must have been awefully lonely. I guess you left the "bawling" to other Quebecers. It was quite effective too, as Quebec gets 60% of all transfer payments, half of civil service jobs from the Ottawa side of the river, CN headquaters, Air Canada, Space Center, billions seemingly on a monthly basis for Bombardier, etc, etc, etc, I guess Harper finally realized it was a lose lose situation, no amount of money was ever enough and all it did was p**s off the ROC. Cheers

  18. To be sure, the PQ was in office in Quebec City during those elections as well. Even so, I do think you have a point. I wonder if that situation (Con majority in Ottawa, PQ in power) would improve Conservative fortunes in La Belle Province? I can see Harper asking for Quebec's federalists to all get behind him to defy separatists.

  19. Harper has never cared about Quebec. In fact he wishes they'd leave.

    However he's not above trying to get a few votes out of them if he can, before they go.

  20. The Conservatives' Quebec opportunities lie in the ridings with large anglo and allophone populations in and around Montreal such as the west island. A couple of Quebec polls are showing the Liberals tanking which means all of their 14 seats are up for grabs. Whether the NDP will be the ones snagging some or the Conservatives, that remains to be seen.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/seco

  21. Harper has never cared about Quebec. In fact he wishes they'd leave.

    However he's not above trying to get a few votes out of them if he can, before they go.

    • The really stupid thing is this has nothing to do with Quebec – unless you count their plan to try to steal all NL's hydro profits again.

      No other province other than NL would be prevented from the passage of electricity through another province's grid to market. Quebec's attempted blackmail of NL is counter to NAFTA and counter to any interprovincial trade relations. Thanks to their own stupidity, they will lose the monopoly on the export of Labrador power – which likely means that, once the ridiculous contract they have presently for the Upper Churchill is done, every bit of that power will also end up routed via NL to US markets.

      Quebec has only its own greed to blame for this.

    • Friend of your enemy is your friend eh?

      Whether it is building cars, or anything else, It's always about Quebec first with those guys.

      I'm dismayed by Charest.

      I expect it from Duceppe.

      Ontario wants out of coal.

      Quebec hydro could be an answer.

      There are more potential customers out there than just the USA.

      Both those guys are full of crap when they speak of carbon reduction. They tout hydro as clean energy, yet want to keep production low, and will fight anyone who also wants to develope hydro.

  22. The Conservatives' Quebec opportunities lie in the ridings with large anglo and allophone populations in and around Montreal such as the west island. A couple of Quebec polls are showing the Liberals tanking which means all of their 14 seats are up for grabs. Whether the NDP will be the ones snagging some or the Conservatives, that remains to be seen.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/seco

  23. I was wrong about you, Patriquin, I retract my earlier statements and offer to bury the hatchet, with a frosty case of Maudite.

  24. BQ was not a coalition partner. They were prepared to support a Lib/NDP coalition in support of the common goal of helping Canada weather the recession that seemed to escape Harper's notice, It'sa as if they were in sinc with the Lib/NDP coalition.

    I agree that both Canadians and American broadcasters should be clear on what the Lib/NDP coalition stood for.

  25. I was wrong about you, Patriquin, I retract my earlier statements and offer to bury the hatchet, with a frosty case of Maudite.

  26. So what should we make of someone campaigning against a coalition which doesn't exist?

  27. Of couse, if the campaign continues as it has, a Conservative majority will become rather theoretical.

  28. Almost everything in a campaign does not exist until the election's over, not the promises, not the platforms, not the seat counts, not the coalitions. Most people know that. You might have noticed that's what happened with the last coalition. Maybe you live in a box.

  29. Almost everything in a campaign does not exist until the election's over, not the promises, not the platforms, not the seat counts, not the coalitions. Most people know that. You might have noticed that's what happened with the last coalition. Maybe you live in a box.

  30. No, the BQ would only be in sinc when it will suit them.

    The BQ will only support a coalition government, such as the one proposed in 2008, if the BQ demands are incorporated. And the BQ was certainly not talking about demands regarding the stimulus package only, (although such demands would have 'provincially weighed too much in any case) Now, pleas, do tell, which other province has such opportunistic seat at the federal table? Tell me, which other province would that be?

  31. Your attempts to remove any nuance from words will not go unchallenged.

  32. You could make of that whatever you want. That is what elections are for.

    The choice for me is clear and has always been clear: I will always chose for a federal Canada.

    And as far as I'm concerned, provincial voters should be making up their mind in provincial elections.

  33. You could make of that whatever you want. That is what elections are for.

    The choice for me is clear and has always been clear: I will always chose for a federal Canada.

    And as far as I'm concerned, provincial voters should be making up their mind in provincial elections.

  34. What Harper has promised is "a loan guarantee or equivalent"; reporters on Harper's plane were told "no taxpayers' money — in the form of cash — would be paid to the province and there would be no help coming for the subsea cable that will link this province with Nova Scotia." http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2011-04-01/

    In other words, Harper has only committed to backing loans in case of default, in order to allow NL to get a lower financing rate.

    The comments that follow the article are unanimous in their cynicism about the likelihood of Harper following through; if they are representative of the population at large, the promise did nothing to increase the likelihood of any seat gain.

    As for Charest and Duceppe: Quebec is upset because the only other route out of Labrador for the Lower Churchill power is through Quebec; they have been trying to hold NL hostage for another ridiculous deal like the Upper Churchill and now they see the potential for those windfall profits disappearing.

  35. What Harper has promised is "a loan guarantee or equivalent"; reporters on Harper's plane were told "no taxpayers' money — in the form of cash — would be paid to the province and there would be no help coming for the subsea cable that will link this province with Nova Scotia." http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2011-04-01/

    In other words, Harper has only committed to backing loans in case of default, in order to allow NL to get a lower financing rate.

    The comments that follow the article are unanimous in their cynicism about the likelihood of Harper following through; if they are representative of the population at large, the promise did nothing to increase the likelihood of any seat gain.

    As for Charest and Duceppe: Quebec is upset because the only other route out of Labrador for the Lower Churchill power is through Quebec; they have been trying to hold NL hostage for another ridiculous deal like the Upper Churchill and now they see the potential for those windfall profits disappearing.

    • I was going to write a similar comment. I agree. Guaranteeing a loan to get better financing . Whatever.

  36. The really stupid thing is this has nothing to do with Quebec – unless you count their plan to try to steal all NL's hydro profits again.

    No other province other than NL would be prevented from the passage of electricity through another province's grid to market. Quebec's attempted blackmail of NL is counter to NAFTA and counter to any interprovincial trade relations. Thanks to their own stupidity, they will lose the monopoly on the export of Labrador power – which likely means that, once the ridiculous contract they have presently for the Upper Churchill is done, every bit of that power will also end up routed via NL to US markets.

    Quebec has only its own greed to blame for this.

  37. Well Dave, that must have been awefully lonely. I guess you left the "bawling" to other Quebecers. It was quite effective too, as Quebec gets 60% of all transfer payments, half of civil service jobs from the Ottawa side of the river, CN headquaters, Air Canada, Space Center, billions seemingly on a monthly basis for Bombardier, etc, etc, etc, I guess Harper finally realized it was a lose lose situation, no amount of money was ever enough and all it did was p**s off the ROC. Cheers

  38. I was going to write a similar comment. I agree. Guaranteeing a loan to get better financing . Whatever.

  39. You have anything other than your paranoid fantasies to back up that second paragraph?

  40. Friend of your enemy is your friend eh?

    Whether it is building cars, or anything else, It's always about Quebec first with those guys.

    I'm dismayed by Charest.

    I expect it from Duceppe.

    Ontario wants out of coal.

    Quebec hydro could be an answer.

    There are more potential customers out there than just the USA.

    Both those guys are full of crap when they speak of carbon reduction. They tout hydro as clean energy, yet want to keep production low, and will fight anyone who also wants to develope hydro.

  41. Québec is useless in Canada. Always whining but taking money from everyone. And I should know, since I'm from there. They don't care about Liberals or Conservatives, they just want your money while they laugh at you. Next referendum, I hope there will be no "Quebec we love you parade". Quebecers will only understand that Canada was too good for them once they lose everything.

  42. Québec is useless in Canada. Always whining but taking money from everyone. And I should know, since I'm from there. They don't care about Liberals or Conservatives, they just want your money while they laugh at you. Next referendum, I hope there will be no "Quebec we love you parade". Quebecers will only understand that Canada was too good for them once they lose everything.

Sign in to comment.