Tag Archives: separatism

Just In: Trudeau Prefers Separation to Harper: David Krayden

Posted on by
Reply

By David Krayden

Canadians have found out, Justin time. OK, nobody likes a wise guy or a pun so excruciatingly bad that it hurts, but aren’t you beginning to wonder which planet or political miasma Justin Trudeau is inhabiting these days? In his latest attempt at dominating the national news, Trudeau mused that since the country had been taken captive by right-wing extremists, that it might be time for Quebec progressives, in that unique land of liberty, equality and fraternity, to carefully weigh their options: “I always say, if at a certain point, I believe that Canada was really the Canada of Stephen Harper — that we were going against abortion, and we were going against gay marriage, and we were going backwards in 10,000 different ways — maybe I would think about making Quebec a country.”

Apparently this is not something that he always says. He would not have exceeded his quota of media hits this week if that were so. But what is so jarringly silly about the accusation is just how utterly inaccurate is the sentiment. Clearly the Canada of Stephen Harper and his majority government is doing nothing to address the fact of unrestricted abortion in Canada. It should. Most Canadians are fundamentally uncomfortable with the current lack of any abortion law. A clear majority do not believe that the “procedure” should be publicly funded. But no matter. The “right-wing” Harper government is not going to change that. As for gay “marriage,” the Conservative government kept its promise to social conservatives to have another House of Commons vote and did so on Dec. 7, 2006. The minority government lost the vote. Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nichols have both repeatedly said that the issue will not be reopened.

So that leaves just 9,998 other “different ways” for Justin to consider Quebec secession. Though one suspects that these separatist incentives might be just as fictitious as the first two.

When challenged by Parliament Hill reporters to clarify his words, PET II was defiant: “The question is not why does Justin Trudeau suddenly not love this country, because the question is ridiculous.” Well thank you so much for making that clear, but it is probably more ridiculous to insist that Quebec should leave Canada because of Conservative government policies that have neither been discussed nor implemented.

Yet what is perhaps more indicative of extreme political egoism is Justin’s refusal to use the declarative of “I” and to speak instead of himself in the third person, as if he were discussing Douglas MacArthur’s return to the Philippines or ensuring we understand that every utterance from this political colossus is worthy of the historical record. Has he entered a dangerous political zone of detachment from reality?

Ultimately, Trudeau’s performance this week should not just be about his evident political immaturity or apparent desire to cripple a promising career in federal politics, one that seemed both assured and inevitable as the offspring of a former prime minister. Nor should it just be about the annoyance of a Quebecer once again insisting that a province of low-productivity, high unemployment and high taxes is setting the standard for the rest of the nation. The real question raised is why anyone expecting to occupy high office in Canada could possibly advocate the secession of a province because he disagrees with the current government of Canada – a government that was duly elected in a democratic vote.

Despite Trudeau’s denial, that question does not seem so ridiculous.

David Krayden is the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies, an independent, not-for-profit institution dedicated to the advancement of freedom and prosperity through the development and promotion of good public policy.

 

Orange Crush Becomes NDP Crushed: David Krayden

Posted on by

By David Krayden

Members of the decidedly withering Bloc Quebecois caucus would probably be the first to acknowledge, with exuberant pride, their Gaullist ancestry, meaning a family tree with its roots in present-day France.  But what the BQ has never lacked – and what really has fuelled its political history – is just plain gall.  The report this week from La Presse, that former BQ leader and defeated Member of Parliament Gilles Duceppe paid his party’s general manager with House of Commons funds – up to $100,000 annually for seven years – is just another example of how this traitorous party has no business conducting the nation’s business; no reason to occupy seats in the House of Commons except to advance a separatist agenda while collecting a pay cheque and furnishing a pension that are provided by the very country that they are so desperately trying to destroy.

It is difficult to imagine another country where a separatist party can not only sit in the federal legislature but has the mind boggling nerve to spend public money on its private agenda.

There are still four of these misplaced Quebec MPPs taking up space in the House of Commons – one less member than required for official party status – so they will not be paying anyone 100 grand a year with public funds but we will be better off when the last of Bloc head is retired.

Writing the cheerless history of the Bloc is a journey through outrageous entitlement.  Let this latest installment in the BQ Story be the final chapter.

At least there was unanimous party condemnation of the arrangement, with the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP agreeing that this was not public money well spent.  When it comes to criticizing the Bloc, it has been difficult in the past to rouse any sort of emotion approaching outrage, disgust or disapproval from the NDP.  For left-thinking socialists, the trough of tolerance for “progressive,” language-embattled Quebec is deep.  The NDP reserves its contempt for anything or anybody standing in the way of its social reengineering project; it could never quite accept the existence of the Reform Party for instance, as if Preston Manning and his fellow MPs should never have shaken up the ideological status quo in Ottawa.

Perhaps the NDP has discovered a growing antagonism towards the BQ because the effervescence of the “Orange Crush” that seemed so perky in Quebec in the last election has gone flat.  According to a CROP poll this week, this post-election burp has reduced the NDP from 53 per cent support last June to just 29 per cent today.  Though the Conservatives are in second place with 24 per cent, the Bloc is not far behind with 22.  Thus the fight for the hard left vote in Quebec has been defined and, if these numbers remain relatively constant, the next election contest should prove to be a tightly contested four-way fight.

Surely, the NDP did not really believe that it could reelect the entirety of its Quebec caucus, this curious assortment of MPs, many of whom never dreamed of sitting in the House of Commons, and at least one of whom never even bothered to campaign. But it will certainly aspire to repeat this electoral phenomenon and it will strive to outdo the separatists in promising Quebec all manner of special status in Confederation and increased protection of its language, culture and way of life – one that includes massive government spending, higher unemployment than the rest of Canada, low productivity and the highest percentage of part-time workers and absentee employees on the continent.

Whether Quebec votes for soft or hard separatism, it is time that the province joined the rest of the country in the economic realities of the twenty-first century.  Many in Quebec are cognizant of this reality and some of the best conservative thinking resides in that province.  Listen to the economic thinking of Quebec MP  (and former foreign affairs minister) Maxime Bernier and you might be listening to one vying for the presidential nomination of the Republican Party.  Hopefully, in the next election, instead of sending 59 MPs to warm the seats in Parliament, they will choose free-enterprise alternatives who have come to Ottawa to get on with the nation’s business and work for a Quebec that is free, prosperous and equal with every other province.

David Krayden is the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies, an independent, not-for-profit institution dedicated to the advancement of freedom and prosperity through the development and promotion of good public policy.

Thinking the Unthinkable: David Krayden

Posted on by

David Krayden

By David Krayden

With the Conservative Party still removed from majority government territory, it looks like another election of close but no cigar. No matter what you think the reason is for the Conservative stall in the polls – voter apathy, distrust of Stephen Harper or just the most boring election campaign in Canadian history – it will be profoundly and historically unfortunate if Canadians hand the Tories their third straight minority government – given what increasingly seems to be the stark alternative: a Liberal/socialist/separatist coalition from hell. That sometime U.S. scholar, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, has finally decided to level with us quaint Canadians regarding his post-election plans in the event that he manages to snatch electoral victory away from the Conservatives. Hence it is time to begin to think the unthinkable in the hopes that this disaster might still be averted. It is a bit like envisioning the Titanic sailing towards New York, but with the prescience to know the catastrophic outcome of that awful maiden voyage.

We have had Liberal/socialist coalitions in the past: Pierre Trudeau managed one from 1972-74 with NDP leader David Lewis. Of course with Trudeau at the helm, it was always difficult to uncover any differences between the Liberals and the New Democrats. What we have never experienced before, at least in Canada, is a coalition government in which the balance of power is held by a separatist party with a massive axe to grind – against English Canada in general and Western Canada in particular.

The Bloc’s participation in federal politics is tragically ludicrous to begin with. What other country would tolerate a host of separatists coming to its federal legislature to openly campaign for the separation of a province? Where else would these same secessionists receive a generous taxpayer funded salary and retirement pension (after only six years in office) from the federal government that they despise and from which they are pledged to remove their province? It is enough to make any patriot wince that this charade has continued now for 18 years – since this political monster was first spawned out of the chaos of the latter Mulroney years. It was silly enough when the Bloc was most inappropriately named “Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition” in 1993. It will be beyond reason if the Bloc becomes part of the Government of Canada, as must surely transpire if the Liberals and NDP are to find enough seats in the House of Commons on May 3.

Neither Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe, nor any of his collected caucus, has ever pretended to have the best interests of Canada at heart when debating policy. These people are determined to destroy Canada. So how can a separatist speak, act or legislate for anything but a separatist agenda? How could any federal party – Liberal and NDP included – even imagine such an unholy alliance?

When the Southern states declared their independence from the American Union in 1860-61, their Congressmen and Senators resigned from their high offices and left Washington to return to their states. They renounced their positions and forgot about the financial compensation. Our separatists stay in Ottawa, offer advice about how federal tax dollars should be spent, collect their salaries, salivate about their pensions and would be quite prepared to dictate national policy as part of a coalition of the losers. This is quite simply a disgusting state of affairs, and Canadians need to think more than twice about the consequences of punishing Stephen Harper once again with a minority government.

They need also to remember that the Bloc is not only a separatist party but a left-wing one that will insist on brutal cap and trade policies designed to bankrupt Alberta and a host of spending proposals designed to bankrupt Canada and satisfy Quebec.

Thinking the unthinkable yet? Do so before it becomes yesterday’s news.

See David’s full bio here.

Separatists want greater control of Parliament

Posted on by

Bloc Quebecois MP Pierre Paquette (Joliette) has tabled the following motion on behalf of the BQ for debate Tuesday in the House of Commons:

“That the House denounce the fact that the government seeks to marginalize the Quebec nation by introducing a bill to decrease Quebec’s political weight in the House, and that it affirm that Quebec Members of Parliament, who represent a nation, must hold at least 25 percent of the seats in the House.”