, 10.04.2018 09:05 AM

Premier Hypocrite

From next week’s Hill Times:

During one of the more-recent debates, last Fall – when controversy was raging about “Liberal” government’s bill that would force women to remove veils when getting on a city bus, or going to see their doctor – Francois Legault, the leader of the CAQ, was asked about the decidedly-unsecular symbol hanging above his head in his workplace.  Legault shrugged.  He said the crucifix should stay. “We have a Christian heritage in Quebec and we cannot decide tomorrow that we can change our past,” said the leader whose very party name is about Quebec’s future.  “I don’t seen any problem keeping it.”

“A Christian heritage.”

Therein lies a problem, of course.  Legault is no longer a mere member of the opposition in the provincial legislature.  In a few days’ time, he will be Premier of Quebec, presiding over a massive majority in the National Assembly.

At his very first press conference after the election, then, Legault dispensed with any notion that he would be the Premier of all Quebecois.  To the Muslims (with their headscarves), and the Jews (with their kippahs), and the Mennonites and the Amish (with their traditional styles of dress), and the Hindus (with their tilaka markings on their faces), Legault’s message was plain: I don’t represent you.  I don’t care about you.  You are second-class citizens – or worse.

Here’s what he said, at that first press encounter: “The vast majority of Quebeckers would like to have a framework where people in authority positions must not wear religious signs.”  And then, knowing what he wants is wholly contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and every human rights code extant, he went even further: “If we have to use the notwithstanding clause to apply what we want, the majority of Quebeckers will agree.”

From the man who said he would march newcomers to the border who lack the ability to properly conjugate verbs, and expel them – to…where? Cornwall? Vermont? Newfoundland and Labrador? – we shouldn’t be surprised, one supposes.  Francois Legault has already revealed himself to be another petty, pitiful aspirant to Maurice Duplessis’ throne. 

He’s a hypocrite.

18 Comments

  1. Gord Tulk says:

    1. Québécois is the term used to describe people of French descent who settled primarily in Quebec but also in what is now north eastern Ontario. The correct English term for residents of Quebec is Quebecers.

    2. That noted, the ACQ could be said to represent the vast majority of québécois living in Quebec off of the island of Montreal.

    3. I think it not a coincidence that Quebec is the province most worried about radical Islam and it is due to two factors:

    high levels of immigration from Muslim North Africa.

    They are better informed about the threat of radical Islam in Europe particularly in France where cities like Paris have no go zones and serious Muslim crime issues.

    4. The laws that that ACQ is proposing are aimed at the radical Muslim threat but of necessity impact other non-threatening religions.

    5. This is in part the harvest that constitutionally enshrined multiculturalism generated.

    6. This will be a huge issue across the country before the next federal election.

    • doconnor says:

      That’s what they where saying about the Irish Catholics 100 years ago with thier radical Popism, high crime rate and many children.

      • barn E. rubble says:

        doconner
        RE: “That’s what they where saying about the Irish Catholics 100 years ago . . .”

        And . . .?

        • doconnor says:

          Now they are 100% integrated and non threatening. (Our gentle host, notwithstanding.)

          • barn E. rubble says:

            doconner
            RE: ” . . . and non threatening . . .”

            That depends on where you play darts . . . just say’n 😉

          • Pedant says:

            They didn’t have a choice NOT to integrate. There was no welfare state. No multiculturalism. No instructions and signs in non-official languages (obviously that wouldn’t an issue for Irish immigrants save a tiny number of unilingual Gaelic speakers settling on the East Coast). It was sink or swim. Plus, the Irish, along with most immigrant groups in the early 20th century, spread out across Canada and into rural areas as well as urban.

            None of this is true today. Diversity (of culture) is not a strength. Unity is, as Maxime says.

          • doconnor says:

            There has always been signed in non-offical languages. Here are Chinese signs on a storefronts in 1937 Toronto. https://www.blogto.com/city/2016/12/what-chinatown-used-look-toronto/

            This article is on the history of Irish immigents to Toronto. https://www.blogto.com/city/2015/03/a_guide_to_irish_toronto/

            It includes the fear of a Catholic take over. The belief that they where all religious radicals and Fenian terrorists. How most of them concentrated in one part of the city.

          • Pedant says:

            I would retort that a few storefronts in Chinatown are a far cry from the way, for example, Markham Ontario looks today. Are we a real country with real official languages or are we not?

            I’m sure Irish immigrants to Toronto tended to settle in certain areas, but as a whole they spread out across the country. Other immigrant groups such as the Ukrainians contributed significantly to populating the Prairies. Today, the overwhelming majority of newcomers pile into Toronto and Vancouver. This does not serve the interests of existing citizens as it inflates the housing bubble (which is great for Boomers, not so great for young people) and stresses infrastructure and government services that are already at capacity.

    • The Doctor says:

      How do laws regulating what you can and can’t wear combat the radical Muslim threat, exactly?

  2. Ian says:

    For over 40 years, the PQ really managed to hold together an impossible coalition along the nationalist-separatist divide. In Federal terms, they had the sort of conservative nationalists that has produced figures like Bernier in the same party as the NDP. That coalition has now broken, the left-nationalists going with QS and ending the moderating effect. Figures like Legault and much of the CAQ have been around all along, albeing gaining in prominence in this era.

  3. Roger A. says:

    As long as the Federal realm is a lame duck, conditions will not improve in Quebec. After “Kokanee Grope” Trudeau entered the same space as Brett Kavanaugh – beer-soaked louts. Julie Payette has to be dragged to do Governor General stuff. Dual citizenship for MPs should never have been allowed – many MPs are more focused on their mother countries than on Canada. Meanwhile, Rédoine Faïd, France’s most-wanted fugitive, eluded police by wearing a niqab for 3 months. The murder of Marrisa Shen by a Syrian migrant. Conditions on the street are now so bad, it follows a very precise sociological logic the Quebecois are atavistically returning to their ancient symbols. Agreed: potentially wicked stuff. But power abhors a vacuum – in this case the vacuum in Ottawa.

    • Peter S says:

      Write in sentences and your point will be more clear. (Comments in this blog are generally written in English.)
      Mr. Trudeau will coast to his reelection because the only power vacuum in Ottawa is in the Conservative leadership.
      Conditions in Quebec will be irrevelant because of the ‘ancient’ symbols.

      • Roger A. says:

        Dude, way to make an English-as-second-language feel at home. The story is told that during the sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad, despite being an officially atheistic state, the Icons were taken out of storage and placed before the troops. The point is: ancient symbols endure; their reappearance suggests a return to primordial realities. The desperate struggle for survival, hunger, starvation, combat, war. Yes, the 6,943,276 lotus eaters may continue this strange journey on cruise control. Meanwhile, did not the CAQ win 74 seats? Are not social conditions in steep decline? Are not relations with India, America, Russia, Saudi Arabia, etc. at all-time lows? We are out here on our own and Ottawa seems to care not. All we have left is the ancient symbols, morale and our will to triumph.

        • doconnor says:

          “Are not social conditions in steep decline?”

          Absolutely not.

          “Are not relations with India, America, Russia, Saudi Arabia, etc. at all-time lows?”

          The India scandal was just a blip, already forgotten by everyone except those with an axe to grind.
          Our relations with America where worse in 1812.
          Our relations with Russia was wrose during the Cold War.
          Saudi Arabia, one of the least democratic countries in the world, are finally getting the condemnation they deserve.

          Why does the CAQ want to strip immigrants of thier of thier ancient symbols?

          • Roy Bland says:

            If a convicted assassin among the entourage is “just a blip”, would hate to see what a real fiasco looks like.

            The War of 1812 was between the United Kingdom and the United States – a victory largely credited to Tecumseh’s Confederacy – “Our relations” did not yet exist.

            Russia did not exist during the Cold War i.e. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Repeat: diplomatic relations with Russia are at all-time lows.

            “Saudi Arabia says feud with Canada will not impact oil supplies” (Global) – talk is cheap.

            Because the Quebecois do not want to end up like Saudi Arabia.

            Does not the CAQ winning 74 seats suggest social conditions are in steep decline? All you have to do is look out the bloody window.

          • doconnor says:

            “If a convicted assassin among the entourage is “just a blip”, would hate to see what a real fiasco looks like.”

            It would involve expelling ambassadors and trade sanctions.

            “Russia did not exist during the Cold War i.e. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Repeat: diplomatic relations with Russia are at all-time lows. ”

            If you want to get technical, then during the Russia Civil War Canada sent troop to try and over through Russian government. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-intervention-in-the-russian-civil-war

            ““Saudi Arabia says feud with Canada will not impact oil supplies” (Global) – talk is cheap.”

            Yes, the Canadian Government’s talk is cheap, but you are still complaining that it is too much.

            “Because the Quebecois do not want to end up like Saudi Arabia.”

            They should stop following in their path of repressing minorities.

            “Does not the CAQ winning 74 seats suggest social conditions are in steep decline? All you have to do is look out the bloody window.”

            It is reflective of the irrational fear that social conditions are in steep decline, but for 200 years Canada has always absorbed a lot of immigrants and there has always been difficulties.

  4. PJ says:

    Most minorities will self deport to other parts of Canada.
    My parents moved to Alberta in 1977, where no government from Peter Lougheed to Rachel Notley ever purposed such a bigoted, racist policy.

    My parents were so much better off in Alberta than they ever would have been in QC.

    I wonder if any QC government had studied the cost to QC of the brain drain of young bilingual Anglophones, Allophones, and yes even some francophones.

    I don’t think they want the answer to this question.

  5. Peter says:

    doconnor is right, it’s the same old story. Immigration is a process that takes at least a generation to work itself thought. First generation immigrants have always had to cope with the challenges of acculturation in a new and strange land, suspicions from the locals and lots of social and family confusions. In more cases than we realize, it doesn’t take and they go back if they can. They typically work very hard and sacrifice, but the payoff for the country comes from their kids, and it’s always been a big one. One of the most noxious trends today (reflected in Legault’s proposals) is the expectation of instant integration. More and more, it seems immigrants are supposed to arrive at the airport speaking perfect English or French and send their kids directly to hockey practice or dance class. That never happened in the past and it ain’t going to happen now. It’s not realistic and it shouldn’t be expected, let alone legislated.

    But if it’s a process for them, surely progressives in the grip of identity politics rhetoric should understand it’s also a process for native Canadians. The sense of dislocation and wariness immigrants feel is mirrored by communities receiving large numbers of newcomers evincing varying degrees of cultural and linguistic unfamiliarity and strangeness. That also is a same old timeless story the world over, but somehow many progressives today have persuaded themselves it’s some kind of grievous character flaw polite people don’t talk about. Decent people all show up at the airport to bestow flowers and hugs.

    Immigration has always been a boon for the country and it still is, but not instantaneously and not without conflicts and stresses. I take JT at his word on his principles, but instead of blathering on about Canadian values and repeating bromides about diversity being our strength (Mr. Prime Minster, that’s long past its sell-by date), he could do so much good by addressing both sides about the realities of the process in pragmatic terms and both empathizing with and challenging them. Somebody has to do it because otherwise we’re going to see more and more people gravitating to extremes.

    Pedant: Betcha a hundred bucks that if you subtract public assistance to immigrants in their first year here, you’ll find a lot more native Canadians on the welfare rolls than immigrants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*