A nasty PQ recipe for non-'citizens'

[Cranky]

PQ party politics can give lessons to third world dictators.

~~~~~~
www.rbcinvest.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/LAC/20071020/EQUEBEC20/Headlines/headdex/headdexComment/16/16/19/
~~~~~~

A nasty PQ recipe for non-'citizens'

Saturday, October 20, 2007 – Page A28

The Parti Québécois is proposing to create two classes of Canadian citizens in Quebec: those who speak French up to a government-imposed standard, and those who do not. Those who do not meet the standard would be denied the right to run for political office, contribute to political parties or sign a petition to the province's National Assembly. Those who meet the standard would be so-called Quebec citizens, with full rights. (Anyone living in Quebec now or born in future to Quebec citizens would be counted as citizens.) The PQ's notion that Quebec has the power to disenfranchise Canadian citizens is ludicrous in a legal sense and repugnant in a moral one. (Perhaps if we could be dyed with different skin colours it would be easier to identify "true citizens"?)

Consider a banker from Vancouver, either native-born or from abroad. She's a Canadian citizen. Her bank transfers her to Montreal. After three months (under the PQ's proposed "Quebec identity act"), she is eligible for Quebec citizenship. To obtain that citizenship, she needs to meet the provincial standard for speaking French and for knowledge of Quebec. If she's not up to standard, the PQ would bar her from contributing to, say, the Liberal Party of Canada if she so chose. If she wishes to express her objections to this law, she cannot sign a petition being put before the Quebec legislature. If she plans to stay, she cannot run for office, not even for a local school board. (Exclusion is the intent here. The PQ's ideal world would be to hang a sign over the 401... "BIENVENUE QUEBECOISE" "NON QUEBECOISE PLEASE REPORT TO THE WELCOMING CAMPS FOR PROCESSING"

One person, one vote is at the core of any democracy. The PQ would diminish the principle by chipping away the political rights that go with having a vote. The party claims to have constitutional advice that its proposal would be considered reasonable in a free and democratic society under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Nonsense. To carve up the core principle of a democracy would require proof of a devastating and imminent threat to that democracy's survival. And what is that threat?

There is none. There are concerns in Quebec about whether the accommodation of religious minorities has gone too far. But the real threat is to the PQ's popularity among francophones. The party has been displaced by the Action Démocratique du Quebec as the main defender of Quebec's francophone identity, largely because the ADQ rushed to the barricades to embrace some xenophobic views in rural Quebec before the provincial election in March; from a party of five seats, the ADQ soared to 41. The third-place PQ is desperate to seize the high ground on Quebec's politics of identity. (Politics of identity? Why not call it something more appropiate? Like linguistic apartheid? How do you say "Yes masta" and "No masta" in French?)

Sovereignty through the back door - that is the purpose of creating Quebec citizenship. With the exceptions noted above, only those with proficiency in French would be entitled to full rights. Everyone else would be sent to the back of the bus. This is a very low road to the political high ground.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I refuse to believe that Quebec society will buy into this linguitsic apartheid. Secondly, where are the Canadian political "leaders" kicking the PQ party in the head over this?

[duster]

Ouch...I have the same esteem for Quebec politics and politicians as I have for brussels sprouts. This is another good reason to think so. If segregation and removing the right to vote of non-francophones gets the PQ elected, well, I don't know which is worse between the politicians who propose this and the portion of the electorate who'll support it.

They do this and the other Provinces and Feds will get nasty. Really nasty. What are they thinking? Lemmings I tell you...

[MC Habber]

This is disgusting, but not quite as bad as I initially thought. They aren't proprosing to strip citizenship from anybody - the law would only apply to new immigrants, and it's about Quebec, not Canadian, citizenship. So it's not quite the transparent attempt to win a referendum that, at a glance, it seems to be.


Deny Quebec citizenship to new immigrants who don't learn French: PQ
PHILIP AUTHIER, The Gazette
Published: Friday, October 19

QUEBEC - Newly arrived immigrants will be required to have an "appropriate" working knowledge of French to be sworn in as Quebec citizens - even if the province is still part of Canada - if legislation proposed yesterday by the Parti Québécois is adopted.

Failing to learn French would bar an immigrant from holding public office at any level, raising funds for political parties, or petitioning1 the National Assembly for redress of a grievance.

The new rules would not apply to people already living in Quebec because they have acquired rights, the PQ says. But new arrivals - 40 per cent of immigrants to Quebec do not speak French - would be encouraged and assisted to acquire the language, which the new bill dresses up as a new "right" for citizens.

"It's like a Bill 101, but in the perspective of the identity of Quebecers," PQ leader Pauline Marois said at a news conference explaining the party's proposal, contained in Bill 195, titled the "Quebec Identity Act."

Marois tabled the bill in the National Assembly yesterday, beating the Liberals and the Action démocratique du Québec to the punch in the struggle to control the political-identity issue.

The PQ's bill is unlikely to become law, because it is doubtful the Liberals or the ADQ will support it. But Marois said that under legislature rules, it at least must be discussed, and that will put the PQ in the thick of a debate raging in the province.

The bill recognizes that since Quebec is not a sovereign country, however, it does not have all powers over citizenship. In fact, Article 49.2 of the bill states a person cannot earn the title of "Quebec citizen" if he or she is not also a "Canadian citizen."

New citizens would also be required to pledge - under oath - that they will be loyal to the people of Quebec and observe its constitution, which the PQ proposes the province draft - even before separation.

Marois said the proposal is no worse than any country's citizenship requirements, including Canada's, though the bill describes a three-year moral contract between immigrants and the state to learn French: They have to learn it; the state has to pay for it.

Under the PQ's bill, Marois conceded, a unilingual anglophone immigrant would not be allowed to run in an election to become mayor of Westmount. The person would need French to do the job properly anyway, she said.

Slipped into news conference was a proposal for a new crackdown on the use of English in the workplace. If elected, a PQ government would impose stiff fines on large firms that fail to acquire francization certificates proving they operate in French.

[Cranky]

QUEBEC - Newly arrived immigrants will be required to have an "appropriate" working knowledge of French to be sworn in as Quebec citizens - even if the province is still part of Canada - if legislation proposed yesterday by the Parti Québécois is adopted.

Failing to learn French would bar an immigrant from holding public office at any level, raising funds for political parties, or petitioning1 the National Assembly for redress of a grievance.(This is linguistic aparteid no matter how many different words are used. I propose camps where they apply the right collour to your skin so they know who the "true" citizens are. Or maybe numbers on their hands? I'm trying to remember who was the last POLITICAL PARTY who did this. just escapes me right now...)

The new rules would not apply to people already living in Quebec because they have acquired rights, the PQ says. But new arrivals - 40 per cent of immigrants to Quebec do not speak French - would be encouraged and assisted to acquire the language, which the new bill dresses up as a new "right" for citizens.(Living iin Quebec? So even other Canadians are not "real citizens". Hell even the Nazis PARTY recognized Germans from other countries. Perhaps the PQ PARTY is even more "advanced" then the Nazis in this regard.)

"It's like a Bill 101, but in the perspective of the identity of Quebecers," PQ leader Pauline Marois said at a news conference explaining the party's proposal, contained in Bill 195, titled the "Quebec Identity Act."

Marois tabled the bill in the National Assembly yesterday, beating the Liberals and the Action démocratique du Québec to the punch in the struggle to control the political-identity issue.

The PQ's bill is unlikely to become law, because it is doubtful the Liberals or the ADQ will support it. But Marois said that under legislature rules, it at least must be discussed, and that will put the PQ in the thick of a debate raging in the province.

The bill recognizes that since Quebec is not a sovereign country, however, it does not have all powers over citizenship. In fact, Article 49.2 of the bill states a person cannot earn the title of "Quebec citizen" if he or she is not also a "Canadian citizen." (Wow, now I feel better. Let's all play this game of "qualifications" for citizenship.)

New citizens would also be required to pledge - under oath - that they will be loyal to the people of Quebec and observe its constitution, which the PQ proposes the province draft - even before separation.(I would pledge loyalty to Quebec even though I am a Canadian citizen? Give me the damn "Not Official Citizen" armband NOW.)

Marois said the proposal is no worse than any country's citizenship requirements, including Canada's, though the bill describes a three-year moral contract between immigrants and the state to learn French: They have to learn it; the state has to pay for it. (BULLSH!T! We "require" immigrants to have a working knowledge of English OR French but we do NOT test them to EXCLUDE people. )

Under the PQ's bill, Marois conceded, a unilingual anglophone immigrant would not be allowed to run in an election to become mayor of Westmount. The person would need French to do the job properly anyway, she said. (Not be allowed to exercise his right as a CANADIAN to hold office based on language. Why not! Better yet, why not a DNA test?)

Slipped into news conference was a proposal for a new crackdown on the use of English in the workplace. If elected, a PQ government would impose stiff fines on large firms that fail to acquire francization certificates proving they operate in French.


~~~~~~~~

Can I see your Quebec Identity Act papers please?

[ropoflu]

habsaddict said:

QUEBEC - Newly arrived immigrants will be required to have an "appropriate" working knowledge of French to be sworn in as Quebec citizens - even if the province is still part of Canada - if legislation proposed yesterday by the Parti Québécois is adopted.

Failing to learn French would bar an immigrant from holding public office at any level, raising funds for political parties, or petitioning1 the National Assembly for redress of a grievance.(This is linguistic aparteid no matter how many different words are used. I propose camps where they apply the right collour to your skin so they know who the "true" citizens are. Or maybe numbers on their hands? I'm trying to remember who was the last people who did this. just escapes me fright now...)

The new rules would not apply to people already living in Quebec because they have acquired rights, the PQ says. But new arrivals - 40 per cent of immigrants to Quebec do not speak French - would be encouraged and assisted to acquire the language, which the new bill dresses up as a new "right" for citizens.(Living iin Quebec? So even other Canadians are not "real citizens". Hell even the Nazis recognized Germans from other countries. Perhaps the PQ party is even more "advanced" then the Nazis in this regaerd.)

"It's like a Bill 101, but in the perspective of the identity of Quebecers," PQ leader Pauline Marois said at a news conference explaining the party's proposal, contained in Bill 195, titled the "Quebec Identity Act."

Marois tabled the bill in the National Assembly yesterday, beating the Liberals and the Action démocratique du Québec to the punch in the struggle to control the political-identity issue.

The PQ's bill is unlikely to become law, because it is doubtful the Liberals or the ADQ will support it. But Marois said that under legislature rules, it at least must be discussed, and that will put the PQ in the thick of a debate raging in the province.

The bill recognizes that since Quebec is not a sovereign country, however, it does not have all powers over citizenship. In fact, Article 49.2 of the bill states a person cannot earn the title of "Quebec citizen" if he or she is not also a "Canadian citizen."

New citizens would also be required to pledge - under oath - that they will be loyal to the people of Quebec and observe its constitution, which the PQ proposes the province draft - even before separation.

Marois said the proposal is no worse than any country's citizenship requirements, including Canada's, though the bill describes a three-year moral contract between immigrants and the state to learn French: They have to learn it; the state has to pay for it.

Under the PQ's bill, Marois conceded, a unilingual anglophone immigrant would not be allowed to run in an election to become mayor of Westmount. The person would need French to do the job properly anyway, she said. (Not be allowed to exercise his right as a CANADIAN to hold office based on language. Why not! Better yet, why not a DNA test?)

Slipped into news conference was a proposal for a new crackdown on the use of English in the workplace. If elected, a PQ government would impose stiff fines on large firms that fail to acquire francization certificates proving they operate in French.


~~~~~~~~

Can I see your Quebec Identity Act papers please?

Brilliant post.

On behalf of all the posters who like me have family members working or supporting the PQ, I'd like to thank you for your, yet again, fair and balanced, analysis of the situation.

Now, if you excuse me, I need to go as fascism is a full time job.



PS: As someonce once wrote :

" remember, this is just a heated debate as is the usuall fare on this board. In some places, it has gone a touch further then it should but no cyber blood has been spilled. Yet.

Keep the level of respect for fellow posters that is expect of everyone here. Watch your comments and how you treat others.

All of us constipated armchair doves and hawks have to make sure that we staple the word RESPECT in our minds."

[Cranky]

Ropoflu,

I am attacking the idea of "Identity Act", not the Quebec people. Notice that I keep saying PQ party over and over again. I can not stress enough that I am talking about the PQ party and THAT is who I am applying the Nazi anologies too.

So, are you in favor of denying people their citizens rights based on language?

[ropoflu]

I'll pass on that one HA. It seems we already have way too many subjects on which antagonize ourselves.

But I still think that the Nazi camp comparison is out of place.

[Cranky]

ropoflu said:

I'll pass on that one HA. It seems we already have way too many subjects on which antagonize ourselves.

But I still think that the Nazi camp comparison is out of place.

Have you heard of the expression.......stir the pot?

Ropoflu, there is nothing wrong with a bit of "heated" discussion. BC and I have shared bread yet we were at it over Iraq. Franko and I have shared bread yet we will go at it for ever when it comes to religion. I don't measure my friends by their opinons and I don't make enemies because they disagree with me. In fact, the more one disagrees with me, the more interesting the conversation.

As for the Nazi comparison, I have a big beef with separating people by language...or colour....or faith. If we are to have a peaceful multicultural society, we all need to be tolerant....even force down our natural tendencies to tribalism. The minute we start separating people on something and testing them on top of that, well, we are on our way to intolerance by legal decree.

[Skilly]

habsaddict said:

As for the Nazi comparison, I have a big beef with separating people by language...or colour....or faith.

OK. For starters I don't agree with segregation. But, correct me if I am wrong, doesn't the United States of America require their immigrants to take a test, a test written in English about US history? I also believe the US requires their immigrants/citizens to have a working knowledge of the English language (they obviously have to be able to read English to take a test) AND they have to be able to say in English "I pledge my allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and the Republic for which she stands ......." I have yet to hear of someone saying it in french, german, swahili ...etc.

Now let's look at Canadian citizenship.

From the government of Canada's website:

Who can become a Canadian citizen

To become a Canadian citizen…

You must be a permanent resident and be 18 years of age or older

Children under 18 years of age can also become citizens, but they do not have to meet the same requirements as adults (see “Applying for children”).

You must have lived here for at least three years

You must have lived in Canada for at least three years (1,095 days) out of the four years immediately before you apply for citizenship. For example, if you applied for citizenship on June 1, 2006, we would count back to June 1, 2002. The time you lived in Canada AFTER you became a permanent resident counts as full time (one day for each day). The time you lived in Canada BEFORE you became a permanent resident counts as half time (half a day for each day) only if it falls within these four years. If you came to Canada on a visa (for example, a student or a work visa) before you became a permanent resident, contact the Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) Call Centre to find out when you can apply for citizenship or use the on-line Residence Calculator available on CIC’s Web site at www.cic.gc.ca.

You must know English or French - Is this not language segregation?

English and French are the official languages of Canada. You must know enough of one of the two languages to understand other people and for them to understand you. That is, you need to be able to speak English or French well enough to communicate with people.

You must learn about Canada

You must know the rights and responsibilities of Canadians, such as the right and responsibility to vote. You must also know some things about Canada’s history and geography, and its political system. When we receive your application, we will send you an acknowledgment letter and a copy of our free publication, A Look at Canada. You will have to answer questions on the information in this publication when you go for your citizenship test. so you also have to write a test ....so you have to able to speak and read the language of the place in which you want to live

[PTH]

ropoflu said:

But I still think that the Nazi camp comparison is out of place.

I very much agree.

[PTH]

habsaddict said:

ropoflu said:

I'll pass on that one HA. It seems we already have way too many subjects on which antagonize ourselves.

But I still think that the Nazi camp comparison is out of place.

Have you heard of the expression.......stir the pot?

Ever heard of Godwin's Law ?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

By its usual interpretation, you just shot yourself down.

As for the Nazi comparison, I have a big beef with separating people by language...or colour....or faith. If we are to have a peaceful multicultural society, we all need to be tolerant....even force down our natural tendencies to tribalism. The minute we start separating people on something and testing them on top of that, well, we are on our way to intolerance by legal decree.

Ah, the famous "Tribalism" that the Globe and Mail and Anglo-Canada think Quebec suffers from, and feels the need to protect us from. Thank goodness for the rest of the country, otherwise Quebec would become a huge concentration camp


---

On the plus side, every time I start to become a federalist, all I need to do is read this board. Really, if I could translate some of what's said and show it across much of Quebec as representative of anglo Canada's thinking, the next referendum is already won.

---

That being said, I don't want us to have two classes of citizens whatever happens. But what's wrong with having people live their lives as "permanent residents" until they've shown that they can actually integrate with the majority? And if they don't, well, they live their lives as they wish, their kids are citizens at birth, and there's no need to make comparisons with mass murderers....

And FYI guys, there seems to be a consensus that Quebec needs a constitution.... even as a province within a country with its own constitution, Quebec remains a nation (remember that?) and every nation needs to define itself somehow.

[Cranky]

pth said:

Ever heard of Godwin's Law ?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
By its usual interpretation, you just shot yourself down.

Hardly. The comparison is to draw attention to what extent one group will go to control another. While extreme, the attempt to create second class citizens it is not without merit or beyond comparison.

Tell me something. I lived in Quebec for twenty years, longer then you have been an adult. I own property in Montreal. If I want to come back and decide that I want to run for mayor, this law would bar me from doing that. This law will strip me from my citizenship rights and there is no way to sugar coat it. To you, at worse it may be "unfair" to me it smacks of.....yes that.

pth said:

On the plus side, every time I start to become a federalist, all I need to do is read this board. Really, if I could translate some of what's said and show it across much of Quebec as representative of anglo Canada's thinking, the next referendum is already won.

C'mon PTH, that is a bit disenginious. I know what you have posted over several years. You are a Quebec nationalist first and a federalist of convinience second. Now tell me that I am wrong.

As for what is said on this board. If you add up all that was ever said by every single poster and multiplied it by a hundred, it would not even come close to what Jacqeus Parizeau says on his quietest night. Secondly...do you want everybody else in the rest of Canada and on this board to just nod their heads in quiet appeasement to every whim of the PQ party and the separtist?

pth said:

Ah, the famous "Tribalism" that the Globe and Mail and Anglo-Canada think Quebec suffers from, and feels the need to protect us from. Thank goodness for the rest of the country, otherwise Quebec would become a huge concentration camp

If you don't call it tribalism then how do you explain endless attempts to find new ways to limit people? At one time, the excuse was to protect Quebec identity, I get that, you got that, now laws like these are capricious and intolerant.

Name me where else in this country, what provinces wants to enacted capricious laws to exclude French speaking people?

As for "feel the need to protect us"...hardly. The "us", or more correctly a minority of the "us" aka separatists is trying to create a two tier citizen system of exclusion. Silence is not an option.

pth said:

That being said, I don't want us to have two classes of citizens whatever happens.

Now we can agree on something. The issue here is what this law is intending to do.

pth said:

And FYI guys, there seems to be a consensus that Quebec needs a constitution.... even as a province within a country with its own constitution, Quebec remains a nation (remember that?) and every nation needs to define itself somehow.

Said who? The PQ? The PQ is hardly the voice of Quebecers anymore. In fact, it's trying to be relevant by shrilling in the voice of intolerance.

pth said:

But what's wrong with having people live their lives as "permanent residents" until they've shown that they can actually integrate with the majority?

Social integration is one thing, draconian and capricious laws to deprive people of their rights until they conform is another.





Now that we got the dancing out of the way.....

Do you want to discuss the true reason why the PQ wants to enact this law?

[Disgruntled70sHab]

pth said:

And FYI guys, there seems to be a consensus that Quebec needs a constitution.... even as a province within a country with its own constitution, Quebec remains a nation (remember that?) and every nation needs to define itself somehow.

November 27th, 2006, "That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada."

PTH, you know I don't always agree with some of your opinions, but I've always respected them. Having said that, I had a problem with this Tory initiative then and it remains a problem with me now mainly because once the term "nation" is used.

I figured a Quebec constitution would have been done by now actually. Yet, if it is determined that Quebec have their own constitution then why not demand that anyone entering the province ... apologies ... nation, speak French?

However, the same consideration must now be given to the indigenous peoples of Canada as well. What about the Inuit? What about the First Nations peoples ... and more specifically, the First Nations peoples in Quebec?

If Quebec can be a nation within a nation, why can't First Nations territories be so within Quebec as well? And since the the precedence has been set in Ottawa, there's no way Quebec can deny this "right" in their own province. If it's good enough for Canada how can it not be good enough for Quebec?

So, once First Nations territories are recognized as nations, there should be nothing stopping them from instituting their own constitution. And the nation of Quebec should have no recourse but to honour it. If Quebec can be a nation within a nation, then they should tolerate nations within their nation as well.

HA, if you want to stir the pot, do it right will ya' ...

Check out the Limbaugh Laws

Cheers.

[PTH]

habsaddict said:

pth said:

Ever heard of Godwin's Law ?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
By its usual interpretation, you just shot yourself down.

Hardly. The comparison is to draw attention to what extent one group will go to control another. While extreme, it is not without merit.

Well, if we're into childish name-calling, denying that French-Canadians need to have more tools to protect their culture from disappearing is like being a Holocaust denier.

Why are you denying the holocaust Why do you hate Quebecers and want to do to us what the Nazis did to the Jews in Germany, and wipe us out ??

---

This kind of talk leads to a dead end, fast. The whole idea of Godwin's law is that comparing anyone, anywhere to Nazis (or Holocaust deniers) is over the top and essentially kills reasonable discussion, since no one will want to be seen on the side of the most reviled people to ever roam the earth.

The world isn't black and white. Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.

I guess I know what that makes you.

[Cranky]

pth said:

The world isn't black and white. Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.

I guess I know what that makes you.

It makes me...my avatar? LOL!

While I never intended to offend you or Ropoflu with my comparison, you understimate how offended I am by this intended legiaslation. I repeat what I said in the other thread. This legislation would make me a second class citizen in a place where I lived for longer then you or most posters on this board have been adults. My wife was BORN in Quebec and even she would be a second class citizen. That is not "offensive in a cyber cafe" world. That is truly, maliciously offensive to the very core.

The main issue of this thread has not disappeared.

[PTH]

disgruntled70shab said:

pth said:

And FYI guys, there seems to be a consensus that Quebec needs a constitution.... even as a province within a country with its own constitution, Quebec remains a nation (remember that?) and every nation needs to define itself somehow.

November 27th, 2006, "That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada."

PTH, you know I don't always agree with some of your opinions, but I've always respected them. Having said that, I had a problem with this Tory initiative then and it remains a problem with me now mainly because once the term "nation" is used.

I've always thought the word "nation" has all kinds of secondary meanings which get in the way....

To me the "nation" motion is equivalent to the "distinct society" in Meech Lake - a symbol that the rest of the country recognizes that Quebec is different, has its own society which is distinct (equal but different) to that across the rest of the country.

However, in the eyes of most Quebecers, the "nation of Quebec" includes all who live on its territory, whichever language they speak. They do however have to respect the law, including bill 101.

Pauline Marois's proposed law is really just a way to try to address the problem of integrating immigrants into the majority community, when the draw of English-speaking North America is so strong.

I agree with her that more needs to be done WRT to integration, I disagree as to the means.

[Cranky]

disgruntled70shab said:

HA, if you want to stir the pot, do it right will ya' ...

Check out the Limbaugh Laws

Cheers.

These damn cyber pots, one never know when one's emotions cause too much heat!

Dis, the problem with this proposed legislation is that it's capricious, malicious and intended to stir hatred. Imagine if any other province enacted a law to limit the rights of French speaking people. Imagine what would happen if Alberta declared that Qubecers who moved to Alberta would not have any political rights unless they took an Alberta citizenship test? ONLY in English? The rest of Canada would be up in arms about it and rightly so.

Worse still.....

There are several hundred thousand Quebecers who have moved out of the province for the heinous crime of trying to make a living. In one stroke, they all become second class citizens. Language based apartheid politics. Plain and simple.

disgruntled70shab said:

Check out the Limbaugh Laws

WOW! Put a white hood on that and cook with hatred.

In a nation of immigrants, it does not take a rocket scientist to see that accomodation is not achieved by exclusion.

[cigarviper]

All in all it's just another brick in the wall.

[Cranky]

cigarviper said:

All in all it's just another brick in the wall.

So few words...and so well said.

Call it stubbornness, call it stupidity, I will not give up the dream of a one Canada.

[MC Habber]

pth said:

ropoflu said:

But I still think that the Nazi camp comparison is out of place.

I very much agree.

Me too, for the record. Why must every discussion be absolutely as polarized as it could possibly be? One might as well start a thread comparing Carbo to Hitler - you'd get about the same amount of useful debate out of that.

--

I wonder if it will ultimately be impossible to preserve Quebec language and culture in a meaningful way, no matter what measures are taken. Globalization may eventually bring about a global monoculture, where other cutures can exist only if people are willing to make the great sacrifice required to live completely separate from the rest of the world. Measures like the one proposed may help to delay it, but in the end, can you have a distinct culture when you have easy access to the "best" of every other culture (Chinese food, for example), and when the "best" of your culture can be exported for a profit?

[Skilly]

habsaddict said:

These damn cyber pots, one never know when one's emotions cause too much heat!

Dis, the problem with this proposed legislation is that it's capricious, malicious and intended to stir hatred. Imagine if any other province enacted a law to limit the rights of French speaking people. Imagine what would happen if Alberta declared that Qubecers who moved to Alberta would not have any political rights unless they took an Alberta citizenship test? ONLY in English? The rest of Canada would be up in arms about it and rightly so.

Worse still.....

There are several hundred thousand Quebecers who have moved out of the province for the heinous crime of trying to make a living. In one stroke, they all become second class citizens. Language based apartheid politics. Plain and simple.

I don't understand this argument. This is already happening in Canada.

A person in Canada can not hold political office unless he meets an age criteria (for example the PM must be 35, mayors can be younger - the youngest was the mayor of Mount Pearl in Newfoundland) and the person is a Canadian citizen. The fact you have to be a Canadian citizen means that there is a language requirement as well (language aparteid as you call it). If Dahliwal (is that his name? .. BC MP) did not have a comprehension of English or French he would not be allowed to be an MP. Also holds true for provincial and municipal politics in Canada. Let me ask you this. Name one councillor, mayor, MP, or MLA that does not know English or French? It doesn't exist because it is a requirement under Canadian Law.

The only difference is that Quebec is coming out and explaining what it means ... in the case of Canadian citizenship it is implied but never directly stated.


The real issue here is not "language apartheid" it is whether one agrees with having a separate citizenship for the Quebecois ... if you do, then they are only slightly different in their requirements than, say, France or Canada. (Unless you can show me someone in France that hold political office and does not know french).

If you disagree with the Quebecois holding a separate citizenship then IMO the debate should have nothing to do with language requirements and more to do with their reason for feeling the canadian citizenship is not enough to distinguish them.

[Skilly]

disgruntled70shab said:

However, the same consideration must now be given to the indigenous peoples of Canada as well. What about the Inuit? What about the First Nations peoples ... and more specifically, the First Nations peoples in Quebec?

If Quebec can be a nation within a nation, why can't First Nations territories be so within Quebec as well?

Hasn't this already occured in Canada?

The fact they are recognized as "First Nation" people implies they are a nation inside Canada.

Take the Inuit for example, they have formed a Nation inside Canada already. Now it is not the Quebec Inuit, but here is a blurb from the Nunatsiavut website:

www.nunatsiavut.com/en/indexe.php

On December 1, 2005, Labrador Inuit celebrated the beginning of the Nunatsiavut Government. As a regional ethnic government in Newfoundland and Labrador, the Nunatsiavut Government has many of the responsibilities and rights of other governments, such as planning for sustainable economic development, protecting and preserving our Inuit culture and implementing social programs on behalf of our beneficiaries.

Since the inception of this new government, former Labrador Inuit Association leaders have been working on building structures to operate as a responsible, democratic government. You will see this democracy in work as we prepare for our first elections in September and October. During this time of transition, we recognize the importance of communicating how this change will affect Labrador Inuit and what your government is doing for our communities and our families.

Nunatsiavut became Canada's fourth territory. (Yukon, NWT, Nunavut, and Nunatsiavut) Is this what we what for Quebec? Make them a territory to recognize their difference?

[Cranky]

Skilly,

I think you are missing the point....

One....why should my wife who was born a Quebecers and myself who lived there for two decades be forced to write a test to have the same rights? Why should I be disenfranchised based on language? Because I wouldn't vote "correctly"?

Two...the "requirement" of having a working knowledge of English or FRENCH to be a Canadian citizen is intended to help new Canadian into society. This PQ party legislations purpose is NOT integration, but rather segregation. See below.

The entire basis of this legislation goes to Parizeau's statement "l'argent puis des votes ethniques". His racist comment about losing the referendum to "money and ethnic vote". It is a statement that is not forgotten by the PQ party.

Read the statement again....

The Parti Québécois is proposing to create two classes of Canadian citizens in Quebec: those who speak French up to a government-imposed standard, and those who do not. Those who do not meet the standard would be denied the right to run for political office, contribute to political parties or sign a petition to the province's National Assembly. Those who meet the standard would be so-called Quebec citizens, with full rights. Anyone living in Quebec now or born in future to Quebec citizens would be counted as citizens.) The PQ's notion that Quebec has the power to disenfranchise Canadian citizens is ludicrous in a legal sense and repugnant in a moral one.

This legislation has NOTHING to do with protecting the French language or culture, it has to do with sublimating "those ETHNICS", disenfranchising the rights of several hundred thousand Quebecers who no longer live in the province and controlling the MONEY to political parties.

Your argument is the same one the PQ party uses as it's basis of "acceptance". While you are arquing your point purely on a debate level and I respect that, the PQ party intent is sinister and morally repugnant. They intend this legislation to disenfranchise, to segragate those who may support "undesirable" results from any future referendum. Remember these words...l'argent puis des votes ethniques...

[Cranky]

machabby said:

I wonder if it will ultimately be impossible to preserve Quebec language and culture in a meaningful way, no matter what measures are taken. Globalization may eventually bring about a global monoculture, where other cutures can exist only if people are willing to make the great sacrifice required to live completely separate from the rest of the world. Measures like the one proposed may help to delay it, but in the end, can you have a distinct culture when you have easy access to the "best" of every other culture (Chinese food, for example), and when the "best" of your culture can be exported for a profit?

MC,

If it was based on protecting the French language then one has very little moral ground to stand on. I was there when Bill 101 was introduced, While I thought it was draconian and in the long term self defeating, I could not argue it's intent.

However....

This legislation is sold by the PQ on a nationalistic basis but it's intent is completely different. Read the content and keep in mind Parizeau's words.

[MC Habber]

pth said:

their kids are citizens at birth

Not according to the article:

Anyone living in Quebec now or born in future to Quebec citizens would be counted as citizens.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

skilly said:

Hasn't this already occured in Canada?

The fact they are recognized as "First Nation" people implies they are a nation inside Canada.

It's a very good point you make Skilly. However, I would say they are a nation within the continent not just Canada. And being indigenous peoples, they make a good case.

Take the Inuit for example, they have formed a Nation inside Canada already. Now it is not the Quebec Inuit, but here is a blurb from the Nunatsiavut website:

Again, indigenous peoples who are recognized as such.

Nunatsiavut became Canada's fourth territory. (Yukon, NWT, Nunavut, and Nunatsiavut) Is this what we what for Quebec? Make them a territory to recognize their difference?

No, I disagreed with the prime minister's motion right from the start. It's not like there was any logical thought given to it. It was more of a flinch on his part in order to outmaneuver Gilles Duceppe's motion to recognize Quebec as a nation.

There was no real dialog or extensive debate in the Commons for this motion. If there had and a logical reason for introducing it the first place, then people may not have rolled their eyeballs the way they were/are now. I feel the reaction to be an honest one given the circumstances.

On that note, I can't blame people for not understanding what Quebec wants to do now. Some of the folks I've talked to are asking how long it will be before Quebec produces its own passport. Extreme? Yes, absolutely. But, another honest question given the circumstances.

BTW, my heritage is Miq'Maq, Irish and French. I've pretty much got all the bases covered. What "distinct recognition" am I entitled to? You know what? Being Canadian is just fine with me.

Cheers.

[Skilly]

habsaddict said:

Skilly,

I think you are missing the point....

I don't think so , ... I just think we are looking at this arguement from two differnet angles. I think, correct me if I am wrong, you think that each province should have the same citizen rights and no special treatment should be applied.

I, however, am looking at this from not a provincial point of view, but at it from a "nation" point of view. This is a PQ motion, and the PQ want Quebec recognized as a nation ...wait they are aren't they. "A nation inside a unified Canada". So if they are a nation then IMO they are entitled to immigration laws into Quebec.

One....why should my wife who was born a Quebecers and myself who lived there for two decades be forced to write a test to have the same rights? Why should I be disenfranchised based on language? Because I wouldn't vote "correctly"?

The saucy answer is, if you are so upset why would you want to move back ... but to answer your question. You are again looking at it as moving inside Canada. If you moved to the US (a different nation) you'd have to write a test. So why not when you move back to the "nation" of Quebec. This is a new Nation, so they would have to determine citizenship somehow .... they have elected to give preference to people living in and contibuting to Quebec first and foremost.

Two...the "requirement" of having a working knowledge of English or FRENCH to be a Canadian citizen is intended to help new Canadian into society. This PQ party legislations purpose is NOT integration, but rather segregation. See below.

It very well may be a underhanded way at protecting their culture .... but I really see no difference than what other nations are doing. Canada may say the official reason is to "help new Canadians into society" but if we had no language requirement onimmigration how long before Canada has English in the minority? There is a cultural aspect to it as well, IMO.

Read the statement again....

OK.

The Parti Québécois Government of Canada is proposing to create two classes of Canadian citizens in Quebec Canada: those who speak English and French up to a government-imposed standard, and those who do not. Those who do not meet the standard would be denied the right to run for political office, contribute to political parties or sign a petitions because they will not be recognized as citizens of Canada. Those who meet the standard would be so-called Quebec Canadian citizens, with full rights.

Anyone living in Quebec now or born in future to Quebec citizens would be counted as citizens.)

This line here is the only line that I feel the debate should be centered on and it has nothing to do with language. Now let's backtrack 140 yrs to July 1, 1867. How did Canada choose who to count as Canadian citizens when she first became a nation? Anyone living in Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Any future people born in those lands would be full citizens. How would you want Quebec to determine her citizens? Obviously, people living inside Quebec should get preferential treatment ..... now maybe your argument that if you were born there you should be a Quebec citizen ... but you have to look at it from the other side as well ... you weren't living in Quebec for 20 yrs, so .... Quebec would not be the first nation to ask people to choose which nation it wants citizenship in, theirs or another.

[Cranky]

skilly said:

Quebec would not be the first nation to ask people to choose which nation it wants citizenship in, theirs or another.

~~~~~~~~~

I, however, am looking at this from not a provincial point of view, but at it from a "nation" point of view. This is a PQ motion, and the PQ want Quebec recognized as a nation ...wait they are aren't they. "A nation inside a unified Canada". So if they are a nation then IMO they are entitled to immigration laws into Quebec.

This is not about immigrants, Quebec has a vast amount of control over this already. This is not about protecting language or culture. This is about "citizenship rights" which is pure politics. This is about limiting other Canadian citizens rights. Even people born in Quebec would be limited by this legislation.

If Quebec is a "nation" that can make other Canadians second class citizens then the ONLY solution and the only legitimate way to do this is to seperate. Period. End of story. If you move to Ontario and Ontario demands that you pass an Ontario Citizenship test to have the same rights as me.... if I move to Newfoundland and Newfoundland demands I pass a Newfoundland Citizenship test to have the same rights as you, then CLEARLY we are a collection of self serving "nations" and no longer citizens of one country.

It's very simple actually. If the only reason to have Canada is to see what advantages can be extracted over each other, what gains can be made over each other, what money can be sucked up from each other, then the best thing to do is break it up. We either have a nation of equality for all CITIZENS or nothing.

Further...

This "we are victims so we deserve anything we can extract" or "we are victims so we can do anything we want to those outsiders" is getting old. If Newfoundland is a victim, if Quebec is a victim, so am I, so are Albertans, so are BC'ers, so is everyone in Canada. We are all the victims of the believeing the BIG LIE that we are all in this together. We are all the victims the BIG LIE that all Canadians are equal and that we share common goals. We are all the victims of the BIG LIE that if we help each other, if we give a little more, we will ALL have a better life. We are all victims of the BIG LIE.

*sigh*

Tribalism is alive and flourishing.........

[Skilly]

[quote author=habsaddict board=NonHockey thread=1192896626 post=1193028054
If Quebec is a "nation" that can make other Canadians second class citizens then the ONLY solution and the only legitimate way to do this is to seperate. Period. End of story. If you move to Ontario and Ontario demands that you pass an Ontario Citizenship test to have the same rights as me.... if I move to Newfoundland and Newfoundland demands I pass a Newfoundland Citizenship test to have the same rights as you, then CLEARLY we are a collection of self serving "nations" and no longer citizens of one country.[/quote]

Again you are looking at it provincially. To me, if Quebec gets "nationhood" then this is no worse than any other country. The arguement is "Do you consider Quebec a nation?" Maybe not now .... but if they are given full nationhood status then this isn't anything but determining who they consider their citizens.

I am sure (maybe off base but I'll go with the reasoning) that this proposed legislation will change. The PQ is not in power and I see this simple as getting the ducks in a row for when they do come to power and when the next referendum is held ...

It's very simple actually. If the only reason to have Canada is to see what advantages can be extracted over each other, what gains can be made over each other, what money can be sucked up from each other, then the best thing to do is break it up. We either have a nation of equality for all CITIZENS or nothing.

This is another thread ... but do not kid yourself, we are FAR from equal in this country called Canada. I jumped into this discussion (a veryinteresting one for me) trying to avoid bringing Newfoundland into it in any way. But if we are truly equal, then the other provinces and the government of Canada should not look down their noses politically at one of the provinces when they ask for something that was previously given to another should they? This country is, and always will be, ran to apease the center of the country.... if Ontario wants you to have something, you have a chance. If it doesn't they start to call you names and drag your province through the mud in the papers (filled with errors I might add) to garner public support against the province's request.

Further...

This "we are victims so we deserve anything we can extract" or "we are victims so we can do anything we want to those outsiders" is getting old. If Newfoundland is a victim, if Quebec is a victim, so am I, so are Albertans, so are BC'ers, so is everyone in Canada. We are all the victims of the believeing the BIG LIE that we are all in this together. We are all the victims the BIG LIE that all Canadians are equal and that we share common goals. We are all the victims of the BIG LIE that if we help each other, if we give a little more, we will ALL have a better life. We are all victims of the BIG LIE.

*sigh*

The BIG LIE is that we do things for the good of the provinces. We do not. We do everything to garner votes in seat-rich Ontario and sometimes Quebec.

Tribalism is alive and flourishing.........

And the easiest way to end it, is for Canada to come off her high horse and actually listen to what is being said and not jump to false conclusions.

[Doc Holliday]

ropoflu said:

But I still think that the Nazi camp comparison is out of place.

It is.

pth said:

On the plus side, every time I start to become a federalist, all I need to do is read this board. Really, if I could translate some of what's said and show it across much of Quebec as representative of anglo Canada's thinking, the next referendum is already won.....

That is actually how the Chretien/Trudeau of this country manage to always keep the country on the cusp of a break: Demonizing the PQ and painting half the province as fascists and racists...

Every country needs to integrate its immigrants. They need to communicate, understand their surroundings and be fully and freely willing to be part of that society. In most country, before becoming a citizen, you'll be tested and if you fail the test, you'll be denied citizenship, won't be able to vote, work and heck, you'll even be asked to leave...

But of course, integrating Quebec immigrants in the Quebec society doesn't sit well with those who'd rather have them remain ignorant and resistant to integration so they can wave the red maple leaf and vote the way they want them to. The hard federalists are terrified at the idea of actually integrating Quebec immigrants to the Quebec society and will fight it every step of the way. They'll wave the same scarecrows they always have.

pth said:

And FYI guys, there seems to be a consensus that Quebec needs a constitution....

...Aaaaaah, there's the rub. As long as being a nation within a country remains an intellectual concept with no concrete application, everyone is all for it but the minute it actually generates anything concrete towards our right to define our nation and integrate the people living in it, then it backfires...

skilly said:

Tribalism is alive and flourishing.........

And the easiest way to end it, is for Canada to come off her high horse and actually listen to what is being said and not jump to false conclusions.

The scarecrows are and will always be waiting in the closet of the next Trudeau/Chretien and their hooligans to use them.