Re: Guess what’s going to rear its ugly head once again

I thought this was going to be something about the 'sacred' scrap.  ; )

Johne Cook
| http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |*
*


On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Peter Chattaway
<petert-LOVM4QxV+tDq6eQxt3vRmLDks+cytr/[email protected]>wrote:

>
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/guess-whats-going-to-rear-its-ugly-head-once-again/article1961773/
>
> JEFFREY SIMPSON | Columnist profile | E-mail
> From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
> Published Wednesday, Mar. 30, 2011 2:00AM EDT
>
> Elections are journeys into the unknown. They produce a result based on
> personalities and promises of today, but whoever wins will face unknown
> challenges and decisions.
>
> There are challenges no one can predict: natural disasters, terrorist
> attacks, recessions. Then there are, as former U.S. defence secretary Donald
> Rumsfeld once quipped, “known unknowns.”
>
> In Canada, one “known unknown” won’t figure at all in the election, but it
> could easily be the dominating challenge for the next prime minister: the
> return of Quebec separatism.
>
> Ever since the demise of the Meech Lake accord and the creation of the Bloc
> Québécois, that party has been the preferred one in federal elections for
> the largest number of francophones in Quebec. What was supposed to be
> temporary – an expression of discontent after Meech Lake – has become
> permanent.
>
> Election after election, Quebec commentators explain this or that ephemeral
> development to account for the Bloc’s enduring strength. All this will pass,
> we’re told. But it never passes, so the disengagement from federal affairs,
> or rather the apparent preference of francophone Quebeckers only to demand
> but never to participate, has become a well-entrenched norm.
>
> As long as a federalist Liberal Party governed in Quebec City, the Bloc
> could be considered more of a nuisance for national unity than a threat. But
> the unduly long stay of the provincial Liberals is drawing to a close.
>
> Premier Jean Charest is extremely unpopular, as is his party. They’ve been
> in office for three mandates, the last secured in December of 2008. They
> have maybe two more years to go before the next vote in which, barring a
> remarkable turn of events, voters will usher in the Parti Québécois.
>
> Then the PQ-Bloc combination will dominate Quebec politics, provincially
> and federally. Facing them will be disorganized federalist forces in Quebec,
> very few of whom will have any links to the rest of Canada, courtesy of
> Quebeckers’ long disengagement from involvement in national affairs and the
> growing lack of interest in the “Quebec issue” outside the province.
>
> The next federal government will have only a handful of Quebec members. The
> dynamics of this “known unknown” will be a government dominated by the “rest
> of Canada,” likely led by Stephen Harper (who’s not popular in Quebec)
> facing a PQ-led province and its Bloc ally in Ottawa.
>
> Article 1 of the PQ constitution calls for an independent Quebec. Creating
> that status is the reason for the party’s existence, as it supposedly is for
> the Bloc. The existence of Article 1 doesn’t mean that a PQ government would
> rush into another referendum. It’s lost two of those, and doesn’t wish to
> lose another with polls still showing that a majority of Quebeckers don’t
> want to leave Canada – although a strange assumption has developed in the
> province whereby a No vote is construed as a mere way station en route to
> another referendum, whereas a Yes vote would be the end of the road.
>
> Rather than hold an early referendum, the PQ-Bloc combination is much more
> likely to launch a kind of guerrilla war of a political variety: complaining
> and hectoring Ottawa, demanding more without ever being satisfied, of
> course, creating (or trying to create) a separate citizenship for
> Quebeckers, accentuating Quebec’s presence on the international stage, all
> the while hoping for mistakes from a federal government whose “rest of
> Canada” supporters will be bored or annoyed by the entire issue.
>
> Who knows how Mr. Harper would respond? While in opposition in Ottawa and
> in exile in Calgary, he was an exponent of what was then called Plan B:
> setting clear guideless for any attempt by Quebec to break up the
> federation. He opposed special status for Quebec, supported the philosophy
> behind the Clarity Act and took firm positions amidst all the mushy rhetoric
> that surrounded Quebec’s secessionist aspirations.
>
> As Prime Minister, however, he declared the Québécois to be a “nation”
> within Canada, forked over billions of dollars to the province as part of
> the “fiscal imbalance,” and played cutesy with the Action démocratique du
> Québec. The real Mr. Harper, if re-elected, will be asked to stand up after
> an election campaign during which these issues won’t be discussed.
>
>
> --
> dadl-ot mailing list
> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot