Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I would support more provincial autonomy in general- for all provinces - but I would be opposed to giving Quebec unique autonomous rights, even if thats necessary to keep Quebec inside Canada.

My mindset is: this is Canada. Take it or leave it. If any province wants to leave, the door is open.

What if the other provinces don't care about or don't want autonomy in these specific areas, but Quebec considers it really important?

Should Newfoundland not have the federally-subsidized ferry service to the mainland just because Saskatchewan wouldn't be interested in having something similar?

[dleung]

A shared concept of human rights would be a good start. Would be weird to have refugees fleeing from one province to the next just because they can't have abortions, or wear a hijab, or run a business in either one of the official languages lol

[lio45]

Originally Posted by dleung

A shared concept of human rights would be a good start. Would be weird to have refugees fleeing from one province to the next just because they can't have abortions, or wear a hijab, or run a business in either one of the official languages lol

Housing is one of the most basic human rights of all, and we’re officially fine with people forced to flee (unaffordable) Province A in order to be able to have a roof over their head (attainable in Province B).

So… zero chance of your suggestion happening. Too many “rights” are of provincial jurisdiction.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dleung

A shared concept of human rights would be a good start. Would be weird to have refugees fleeing from one province to the next just because they can't have abortions, or wear a hijab, or run a business in either one of the official languages lol

You can't run a business in French in most of Canada anyway as a whole bunch of stuff you'd need to do that from the province and municipality simply isn't available in French.

Quebec is just about the last province I'd be worried about if my main concern was abortion rights.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by dleung

Would be weird to have refugees fleeing from one province to the next just because they can't have abortions, or wear a hijab, or run a business in either one of the official languages lol

Wearing a hijab is not a human right, it's a symbol of patriarcal domination over women. Women are being killed in Iran and elsewhere because they oppose this symbol of oppression. It's frankly obscene to call it a human right!

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What if the other provinces don't care about or don't want autonomy in these specific areas, but Quebec considers it really important?

Should Newfoundland not have the federally-subsidized ferry service to the mainland just because Saskatchewan wouldn't be interested in having something similar?

IMO, its ok for autonomy to be made "optional", as long as every province can choose it. CPP is a good example; Quebec has its own QPP. Other provinces could, if they wanted to, withdraw from CPP to make their own pension plan, but only Quebec has decided they want to.

I'm ok with an assymetric federalism where some provinces have more autonomy than others based on their own choices. What I'm not ok with is a model where Quebec is the only province that can choose certain autonomies.

For example, I'm supportive of allowing Revenu Quebec to collect federal taxes from Quebec residents on behalf of the CRA, as long as other provinces could choose to do the same if they wanted to.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Wearing a hijab is not a human right, it's a symbol of patriarcal domination over women. Women are being killed in Iran and elsewhere because they oppose this symbol of oppression. It's frankly obscene to call it a human right!

You may not be familiar with dleung yet, but FYI he’s definitely not the type who’d let being obscene get in the way of a good trolling opportunity.

[dleung]

^^I thought it was about secularism, not snuffing out Islam! Get your story straight lol

Originally Posted by lio45

Housing is one of the most basic human rights of all, and we’re officially fine with people forced to flee (unaffordable) Province A in order to be able to have a roof over their head (attainable in Province B).

So… zero chance of your suggestion happening. Too many “rights” are of provincial jurisdiction.

Housing as a human right is the reason tent cities are allowed on public land. No one is forbidden from providing shelter for themself. They just aren't entitled to a Vancouver condo. Not the same as being forbidden from owning property or being discriminated from doing so (ie redlining)

Originally Posted by Acajack

You can't run a bunch in French in most of Canada anyway as a whole bunch of stuff you'd need to do that from the province and municipality simply isn't available in French.

Quebec is just about the last province I'd be worried about if my main concern was abortion rights.

Missing the point. No one in Canada needs to worry about abortion, because it's not "states rights" like with the shitholes down south, whereas we have some form of "states rights" with hijabs and languages.

Being let down by the level of Francophone service in Kamloops BC is not the same as being forbidden from running an English business in Montreal

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

You may not be familiar with dleung yet, but FYI he’s definitely not the type who’d let being obscene get in the way of a good trolling opportunity.

Though in all honesty, being able to wear a hijab (or even a niqab or burqa) in all circumstances of one's life both public and private without exception, is probably seen as essential, basic, inviolable human right by a majority of Canadians now - at least outside Quebec.

So in that sense dleung isn't really that out of touch.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dleung

Being let down by the level of Francophone service in Kamloops BC is not the same as being forbidden from running an English business in Montreal

No, no. I know full well that anglophone rights in Quebec count way more for you than francophone rights outside of Quebec.

Don't worry! It's always been perfectly clear.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

What if the price to keep Québec in was to give it more leeway to do its own thing inside the federation?

It's not easy to answer a vague question like that, so I'd say yes, and no.

We are all allowed our own opinions here, so my opinion is that the needs of the country should be held at higher importance than the needs of any one province. If any province wants to push the limits of the constitution and the laws of Canada, then there should be due process with the understanding that there may be success, failure, or compromise (which is success by my metric).

IMHO, Quebec already has quite a bit of leeway to do its own thing, and appears to push the limits more than any other province... and it has "Canada" to use as a hostage whenever things aren't going in some particular way.

Regardless... all I want is 'my country' (which includes Quebec) to remain as one, so nobody should be surprised by my previous post. But it doesn't matter what I want, so maybe I will someday be living in the 51st state of Atlantica. Guess I better brush up on my firearm skills...

[lio45]

Originally Posted by dleung

Housing as a human right is the reason tent cities are allowed on public land. No one is forbidden from providing shelter for themself. They just aren't entitled to a Vancouver condo.

Huh, when did you actually become reasonable? Similarly, no one is entitled to having a position as a Quebec judge or policeman while wearing a paper bag over their head on the job, or to working as a Quebec doctor while being an unilingual speaker of Polish.

Nice to be in agreement for once! A rare event.

People flee Vancouver because they’re too poor to manage to get housing;
People flee Quebec because they’re too unilingual Anglo to manage to get jobs.

Same idea.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by LightingGuy

I'm moving my post here from the Montreal-Toronto thread, since it's more relevant to this thread.

"My take is that it is pretty obvious that Bill 101 hurt MTL. It's not the only factor, but it had some effect. That said, even though I personally disagree with the bill, I understand why they did it.

Not MTL, but my brother lives in QC and I've visited. My wife and I also stayed in Gatineau a few weeks ago. It really is a different world. I wonder if it felt that "different" before, or if it's as a result of the bill. As soon as you cross over from Ottawa and walk around, everyone speaks French. Also, just going into stores/restaurants/businesses, things seem to be a lot more laidback, and (without trying to be insulting) less conscientious.

A really interesting thing I noticed is how many immigrants there are from other French speaking countries - Haiti, a few African countries. I can't recall the exact stats, but I looked it up and the percentage of French speaking immigrants in Gatineau (and I'm sure the rest of Quebec) has exploded over the last 20 years. I think it's awesome that Canada is able to offer that to other French speaking countries - a French speaking developed region that will welcome you, so you can have access to a better life without the language barrier."
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9881430&postcount=294

Your observations are pretty good. I live in Gatineau and this is what has been going on for a while now.

As you can imagine it's even more striking in a city such as Montreal.

Though quite a few of our fellow SSPers are ignorant of this or even deny that it exists.

The fact that the countries of origin of francophonie immigrants can be different from those of immigrants to the ROC also gives a somewhat different vibe to contemporary diversity in Quebec, with less kinilaw and samosas, and more méchoui and merguez. Just to use an example from cuisine.

And as you also mention this is actually a competitive advantage for Canada as a whole - another tool in our toolbox to draw good people here.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by lio45

Huh, when did you actually become reasonable? Similarly, no one is entitled to having a position as a Quebec judge or policeman while wearing a paper bag over their head on the job, or to working as a Quebec doctor while being an unilingual speaker of Polish.

Nice to be in agreement for once! A rare event.

People flee Vancouver because they’re too poor to manage to get housing;
People flee Quebec because they’re too unilingual Anglo to manage to get jobs.

Same idea.

Or they flee Quebec because they're too Muslim to work as a teacher (hardcore Evangelicals ok though cuz no one can tell!)
Or they flee Arkansas because they're too female to never have an unwanted pregnancy
Or they flee Missouri because they're too black to get a mortgage

It's all exactly the same and fine right?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

This is probably what a Brit would have written in regard to Ireland back in 1913, and yet now they are best friends.

But this isn't that. Ireland and England are not involved in any part of my post.

But for the record, you'd be completely happy with a strip of France from, say, Bordeaux to Nice, separating from the country to become part of another country (England, for example... or maybe Iran?), or just becoming their own autonomous state, thereby separating French territories? Perhaps it would be alright if the lower separated portion became part of Spain? If this were to happen in the next near future you'd be happy with it... do I have this right?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What if the other provinces don't care about or don't want autonomy in these specific areas, but Quebec considers it really important?

Should Newfoundland not have the federally-subsidized ferry service to the mainland just because Saskatchewan wouldn't be interested in having something similar?

Kind of an 'apples to bananas' (or perhaps apples to elephants, or apples to sheet metal? ) comparison. Federally-subsidized infrastructure happens in all provinces.

For example I don't consider the $1,306,238,853 being contributed by the feds to extend Montreal Metro's Blue line to be a sign of 'provincial autonomy'. It's a negotiated monetary support for necessary infrastructure that's pertinent to that location (and is of benefit to Canadians), from the federal government of Canada to a city in Quebec, because Quebec is part of Canada. It's one of the things that makes a country function as a country.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

But this isn't that. Ireland and England are not involved in any part of my post.

But for the record, you'd be completely happy with a strip of France from, say, Bordeaux to Nice, separating from the country to become part of another country (England, for example... or maybe Iran?), or just becoming their own autonomous state, thereby separating French territories? Perhaps it would be alright if the lower separated portion became part of Spain? If this were to happen in the next near future you'd be happy with it... do I have this right?

Well, we had a part of our country separated from us by force, it's now called Belgium, and we're sort of ok with it.

England is also separated from Northern Ireland by the independent Republic of Ireland, but they somehow manage.

In any case, if Quebec voted for independence, it's not something either you or I could change anything about. You have to make a positive case if you want to convince them to stay, not a "I would hate them if they leave".

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

For example I don't consider the $1,306,238,853 being contributed by the feds to extend Montreal Metro's Blue line to be a sign of 'provincial autonomy'. It's a negotiated monetary support for necessary infrastructure that's pertinent to that location (and is of benefit to Canadians), from the federal government of Canada to a city in Quebec, because Quebec is part of Canada. It's one of the things that makes a country function as a country.

How about the Pont Champlain in Montreal, entirely funded by the federal government (and toll free), as opposed to the Confederation Bridge to PEI, built as a public/private partnership and with a toll of $50.00.

I wonder if Ottawa could negotiate with Quebec to get reimbursed for the cost of the bridge after separation?

Only one of many things that would have to be negotiated in the divorce proceedings.

[Acajack]

Every time this issue comes up (just once in a blue moon of course!), ROCers always focus the discussion on money, but the truth is that if you look at global history, the question of independence - yay or nay - is never primarily about money.
I am not saying this to deny or deflect. I've actually studied this a lot and it's almost always true.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by Acajack

More tidbits from the poll:

For the first time in a long time more francophones are for the Oui than for the Non: 48 to 41% with the rest undecided or refusing to answer.

The PLQ is at 4% support among francophones.

My SO's also going through the same evolution. Was vehemently federalist while living in Asia and Europe.

Ironically, living in Toronto has pushed my SO the other way, and now softly in the Oui camp. Shocked and angry at how marginalized French is in Toronto, especially in regards to government services (I guess it's not surprising given how toothless the FLSA is). With the OPS alone, SO's had to file multiple ombudsman complaints.

The City also classified my SO as "Anglophone" by default, and refused to offer services in French. It took so many bureaucratic hurdles to prove Francophone status, and frankly at this point it's just getting ridiculous.