Politics and Press

Once again, Quebec goes to the polls

On Monday, Quebeckers once again have the opportunity to shake up the rest of Canada (ROC) by going to the polls. It seems very unlikely that the newly-elected government will be the same as the current one, that is run by a federalist Liberal party with a majority under the current premier Jean Charést. For the first time in 125 years, it seems inevitable that there will be a minority government in Quebec, as the traditional two-party federalist-separatist (Liberal-Parti Quebecois) voting pattern has been broken by the rise of a third party, Action Democratique du Quebec, under their young leader, conservative populist Mario Dumont. There seems to be general agreement that he has run the best campaign of the three party leaders, resulting in polls showing a virtual three way tie in popular votes and an absolutely unpredictable distribution of party numbers in parliament under the winner take all riding system.

But political junkies strongly suspect that M. Dumont’s spectacular rise in popularity and his potential role as kingmaker (if not king) on Tuesday may be mainly due to dissatisfaction with the other two leaders and their parties. In particular, Andre Boisclair, the young erratic leader of the Parti Quebecois, has managed to convince even many separatists to at least park their votes with Mario Dumont, who, unlike M. Boisclair, has pledged not to hold a referendum on separatism, which many separatists don’t want at this point, convinced they would once again lose. Dumont has also vowed not to go onto a coalition with the Parti Quebecois. Many separatists also look with favour on that, hoping that a leader of the Parti Quebecois may soon arrive who reminds them a lot more of party-founder René Levesque than does error-prone M. Boisclair. So it seems that the most likely result of Monday’s election will involve some kind of coalition brokered by Dumont and Charest, with a probable Liberal premier of a minority government and the Action Democratique holding the balance of power.

A tale of two countries.

Condoleeza Rice made short hop up to Ottawa last week, perhaps to try to smooth ruffled feathers after George Bush once again failed to mention Canada in his discussion of countries contributing to the war effort in Afghanistan. But she was there long enough to be confronted by the unanimous verdict of the Canadian Supreme Court - 9-0 - that it was unconstitutional for the government to override the judicial system or the Canadian Charter of Rights in dealing with suspected terrorists. Shortly after that a solid majority in the House of Parliament voted to retire special legislation that had made circumvention of the usual legal practices in the wake of the attack on New York and Washington a possibility. The differences between the two countries five years after that attack could hardly be more startling.

While the US has allowed that terrible day to turn it into something of a rogue fortress state, demanding visas for citizens of the great majority of countries and passports for all visitors including soon neighbours travelling by car, Canada has changed very little other than by displaying increased vigilance by police authorities at border crossings and closer surveillance of suspicious groups in urban areas. A recent poll showing that almost 50% of foreign travellers considered the US (and not Russian or China) to be the most unwelcoming place to try to visit, while 2% chose Canada, shows one of the potential long-term consequences of these policies. According to a recent article in the NY Times, foreign business people are beginning to avoid travel to and meetings in the US. It may be that Canada will prove to have been a bit too naive in its mild response to terrorist threats, but it would be a hot winter day in the Yukon before you’ll find any Canadians who wish they were holed up behind the walls of a fortress.

Canada and France, Round five

So the French have managed to do it yet again. The magnificently named socialist presidential candidate Segolene Royal announced in Paris to visiting separatist Parti Quebecois leader André Boisclair that she favours “the sovereignty and liberty” of Quebec. Mme Royal, who declined an invitation by the provincial government to visit Quebec and apparently has never been there, received thundering blasts from both the premier of Quebec, Jean Charest, and the new federal Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion, telling her to mind her own business. The tone of these responses should give her some idea of how France’s relationship would be with her NATO ally should she become president. Dion, a dual Canadian/French citizen with an honours PhD from France’s most elite graduate institute, reminded Mme. Royal of historical developments she seems to have overlooked, and didn’t even mention the liberation of France in 1944 by, among others, Canadian troops.

“The problem with her declaration” said Dion from Quebec City in his native French, “is that we have been free longer than the French because we had responsible government while they were still in the midst of debating empires and revolutions. So Canada is a pioneer of freedom and always will be…. I don’t understand. We do not interfere in the affairs of a friend country”.

After Charles de Gaulle trumpeted his infamous “Vive le Quebec libre” in Montreal forty years ago, he was ordered out of the country. Mme. Royal may find she has trouble getting a visa to even enter.

The Québécois, A Nation, Sort Of

While our own MacKenzie Brothers are hanging out in Munich’s Bier Gartens their home country has decided to make one of its provinces more special than all the others. The Quebecois has been named a nation within a more-or-less unified Canada. What next? A seat in the UN for Quebec? A separate Olympics hockey (the ice variety) team? Foie gras fighting it out with sweetbreads for national food of the Quebecois?

Apparently Michael Ignatieff started all of this by suggesting such a move on a French language TV station in Quebec province that he figured no one outside of Quebec would tune in to. Till now, Ignatieff was viewed as the reincarnation of Pierre Trudeau and at least one of the MacKenzie brothers suggested he was smarter than all of the U.S. cabinet put together. The jury is still out on that claim – probably a close call - but this move does not provide much support for it.

Canada Leaves Green for Brown

Canada is making it into the German papers more than it used to, but it’s not always for flattering reasons. It used to be that the only Canadian stories worth carrying had to do with grizzly bear attacks, Quebec separatism (almost always misportrayed) and sports; Steve Nash is Dirk Nowitzky’s best friend or Canadian thugs won another match against European skilled squads. The latter has however disappeared of late as Sweden showed it could beat anybody in any number of ways, including thuggery.
Bur now Prime Minister Harper actually gets his photo in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, just like the fantastic twins now ruling Poland. And that’s a bad sign, because the twins never get in unless they’ve done something extremely silly. So there was Harper making a speech in which he attempted to announce that Canada was getting out of its Kyoto commitments. This did not go over well, to put it mildly, and now this decision will have to be reconsidered. A Canadian prime minister should know he’s in big trouble when the foreign press begins to compare him very unfavourably to Arnold Schwarzenegger.