HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: "F/E" versus "Bienvenue/Welcome"
Date: 30 Jul 92 13:36:33 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Mark Anthony Young) writes:
>But then, how do you explain the fact that Simpson's and Eaton's, two
>companies with English names, had to change _their_ signs?

How would I know? Furthermore, didn't you observe that their name also
changed in ONTARIO? Do you think Law 101 applies in Ontario as well?
So stop getting paranoiac and stop inventing your own little stories
of pseudo-oppression. Maybee Eaton's wanted to get rid of it's
"vieille grosse anglaise" image.   :-)

>Also, do you expect us to believe that the real estate company that
>was the original topic of this discussion would be less knowledgeable
>about the requirements of the law than you (who didn't even know that
>putting a "Bienvenue/Welcome" sign in the window was illegal)?

I didn't know it because I see bilingual and ENGLISH ONLY signs VERY
often in Quebec. A Law doen't mean it's respected, so stop being
totally paranoid about it.

Furthermore, some people on the net told me that they were not sure
if the Bienvenue/Welcome sign was legal or not.

>Face it, Franc,ois, you're not only not a legal expert, you are
>woefully uninformed when it comes to the provisions of Que'bec's
>language laws.  

Sorry, but I have other things to care about than inventing reasons why
"McEnna's Flower" and Eaton's changed name. I suspect that it was
entirely for marketing reasons. Furthermore, from what you are saying,
you seem to be misinformed also.
-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
                                      Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Quebec income tax
Date: 25 Jul 92 15:04:06 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <24JUL92.09095754.0227@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94) writes:
>>
>>  > Income tax forms are available in English, though my gratitude for
>>  > having to fill out two forms, when everyone else in Canada has
>>
>Yes, that's perfectly true.  I was digressing from the original
>subject line.
>
>But *why* does everyone have to do it?  That's what no one has ever
>explained to me.  It gives Quebec no real independence in setting
>tax policy, since it follows almost every change in the tax system
>which Ottawa decides on.  It inconveniences all of us, French and
>English speaking alike, every April.  It provides jobs for the
>employees of the Quebec Ministry of Revenue.  But who else benefits?
>
>Tom Box
>CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA

Before WW II, we were filling only one form, Quebec one.  Quebec was
subsidizing Canada indeed.  So, Canada is the one that should not
have her separate form and leave this to Quebec.  Any Ministry that
should be adjusted to every province should not exist at the Federal level!

-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Barthelemy Jarret (1471) -> Andre Jarret, sieur de Beauregard (1665)
\_.-===   -> Denis Beauregard (1992)                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steven C. Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Richard Holden & compulsory bi-elections
Date: 29 Jul 92 02:09:09 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 2541

From article <m=V-HQB@engin.umich.edu>, by marky@engin.umich.edu
 Mark Young writes:-

> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steven C. Potter) writes:
>>From article <12395@audetf>, by audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet):
>>> Who is Richard Holden?
>>> -- 
>>>                                                        Francois Audet
>>
>>  Who IS Richard Holden?
>>
> Well?  You're the one who brought him up, so you must have SOME idea.
> 
> If not for Franc,ois, please answer for the benefit of those of us who don't
> get Quebec news, who thus far have been forced to infer and outright guess.
> 

  Richard Holden was 1 of 4 M.N.A.s elected on the Equality party platform
  in the last provincial election here.

 (I won't go into the history of the E.P. or analyse the election results
  unless that is a new subject area people want to get into.)

  He is the M.N.A. for Westmount.

 (By a curious coincidence (?) the Westmount riding has been dropped for
  the next election. It has been combined with the downtown area.)

  He has broken with party ranks on several occasions, he has openly
  criticised the party leadership and was thrown out of the party. He has
  remained in his seat, despite repeated calls from his constituents to
  vacate it. Recently he was seen with Parti Quebecois Brass during a
  nationalist rally (I think it was St. Jean Baptiste Day, but I'm not
  sure). He said a few days ago that he would consider joining, or he
  wouldn't mind joining, the Parti Quebecois if Quebec separates. He
  astounded many in the English community in Montreal, even some of
  his critics, when he pronounced that he believed that the Parti
  Quebecois would be the best party to look after the interests of
  the English community in an independent Quebec.

  He writes a column, fairly regularly I believe, for either the
  "Downtowner" or the "Westmount Examiner" (I'm not sure which) -
  one of those local rags.

  He is a self-confessed gadfly.

  He is largely regarded (this is my impression - I don't have any
  solid evidence to support the claim) as a large, but loveable, fool!

  His grandchildren probably think the world of him.

  There's more, but I think that should be sufficient to bring you
  up to date.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: God Save your Queen
Date: 30 Jul 92 18:46:18 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Robert Story) writes:
>She's NOT *pretending* to be the Queen of Canada, she IS!

>So, what you're saying is that Quebec can be a distinct society
>but when it comes to TROC, we can go go screw OUR heritage?

You can keep your heritage: just don't IMPOSE it on others. What would
you say if your passport said you were a subject of the King of France
(if he would still exist), or the Pope, or the Bonhomme Carnaval, or
anybody you couldn't care less about because so other part of the
country decided that it was part of their heritage?
-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
                                      Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: QC SECESSION
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 03:00:08 GMT

In article <BryBDx.AK5@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.183230.6216@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>>Quebec has to write Canada a cheque for around $100 billion dollars
>>(plus or minus a few billion depending on the formula) before it can
>>separate...it will have to raise this money internationally in a
>>new Quebec currency...this should be a sufficient deterent to
>>separation.  Canada's (and Quebec's) huge debt basically make
>>separation a fiscally dubious proposition...
>>
>>Even if the debt repayment were rescheduled over several years...
>>it would represent a huge fiscal burden to Quebec and Canada.
>>
>>Until Canada and Quebec clean up their balance sheets, separation
>>is basically suicidal for both sides.
>>
>>Gerald
>
>Indeed.  Canada will have to give Quebec some billion (don't know how much)
>in real estate, Crown companies, etc.  Counting how much it will cost
>in both money and trouble and considering Quebec still wants to leave,
>then you will see how profound is the ill, how bad Quebec is feeling.

Well, the giving BY Canada would amount to giving up the land and
crown assets that are in Quebec.  (It wouldn't make much sense to give
Quebec land in BC, or the North West Territories!)

Nobody can be certain what sort of valuation would be done, but it is
HIGHLY unlikely that Quebec would receive the crown assets debt-free.
The Government of Canada has taken out hundreds of billions of dollars
worth of loans over the years, which has gone in part towards paying
for Federal facilities that are inside the province of Quebec.

It would be silly to demand those facilities, ("Demanding our rightful
assets") and think that there not going to be corresponding debts
("Taking responsibility for the rightful debts.")

I haven't heard anything that leads me to believe that the Quebecois
have thought about how they would take on the RESPONSIBILITIES
associated with sovereignty, including things like debt.  I don't
think that many have thought very hard about it.  There's much
excitement about the idea of "Quebec libre!", but little thought of
the "day after," when the responsibilities start to sink in.
-- 
Christopher Browne
cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca
University of Ottawa
Master of System Science Program
From: sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca (Stephane Boucher)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Monument to de Gaulle
Date: 24 Jul 92 01:13:54 GMT
	<1992Jul23.153804.20583@spxtech.qc.ca>
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal

>>>>> On 23 Jul 92 19:38:04 GMT, steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steven C. Potter) said:
  > X-Bytes: 677

  > From article <1992Jul23.160526.1822@pandora.matrox.com>,
  > by thood@corvus.matrox.com
  >  Thomas Hood writes:-

  > > Recently, a monument to Charles de Gaulle was unveiled in
  > > Montreal with some fanfare.
  > > 
  > > ...
  > >

  >   I wonder how many people with a bad taste in their mouth (excuse
  >   the metamorphosed metaphor) are looking for a city disposal site
  >   for old cans of paint. :-)

Well, if you are looking for a city disposal, there's a
piece of land in Ottawa where they have already placed some
junk: a two legged thing mounted on a horse.

I know that this is the first place I'll go. It will
probably be very soon, because I have a really bad taste in
my mouth.

--
  ,                          ,                           ,
Stephane Boucher, ing. jr. | Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca        | Tel: (514)340-5950
sbo@info.polymtl.ca        | Fax: (514)340-4078
From: thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: English services in Quebec ( was Re: Biliguism)
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:02:34 GMT
Organization: Matrox Ltd.

CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA> writes:

>In article <1992Jul23.152901.1631@pandora.matrox.com> thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:
>>driver's licenses and income tax forms are provided in English, and so on.

>English driver's licenses?  This is news to me.

Oops.  The licenses themselves are in French.  I meant to say, the
application forms.

--
Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
From: steve@aqua.ocunix.on.ca (no)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Bilingualism at universities (was Re: Bla, bla)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 01:06:03 GMT
Organization: The Aquarium, Ottawa, Ontario

Oui, la genie est une exemple d'un faculte principalement anglophone, mais 
si on voyait la faculte des sciences politiques?  La quatrieme annee est 
entierement en francais (une amie anglophone m'a dit)

Et en passant, c'est "Universite d'/University of Ottawa", et toute 
affichage est en francais premierement, puis en anglais.  Chaque membre du 
personnel que j'ai rencontre est francophone.

============================================================================
                     steve@aqua.ocunix.on.ca
============================================================================
The Aquarium BBS  (613)736-1481  1200-14400 bps  V.32bis  V.42bis  HST
                      Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
============================================================================
From: fveillet@veietto.uucp (Francois Veillette)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: The Senate reform
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:39:37 GMT
Organization: Veietto, Private Site, Montreal, Canada

I'd like to know what is the Big Deal about the Senate reform?

Why is Alberta pushing so much for an equal Senate?

For me, the Senate should be abolish.
If it sould stay and be elected, the senaters must be distributed 
by population ratio.  I'm mad at the idea that P.E.I. could have
1 elected senater for 100 000 people (8 senaters for 800 000 electors)
and Quebec or Ontario 1 elected senater for 1 000 000 people!!!

	confusingly yours,
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Richard Holden & compulsory bi-elections
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:01:20 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steven C. Potter) writes:
]  He has broken with party ranks on several occasions, he has openly
]  criticised the party leadership and was thrown out of the party. He has
]  remained in his seat, despite repeated calls from his constituents to
]  vacate it. Recently he was seen with Parti Quebecois Brass during a
]  nationalist rally (I think it was St. Jean Baptiste Day, but I'm not
]  sure). He said a few days ago that he would consider joining, or he
]  wouldn't mind joining, the Parti Quebecois if Quebec separates. He
]  astounded many in the English community in Montreal, even some of
]  his critics, when he pronounced that he believed that the Parti
]  Quebecois would be the best party to look after the interests of
]  the English community in an independent Quebec.

So he's an anglo who is not totally paranoid about the PQ?
Interesting.

Even more interesting is that the "nationalist press" (like some
people say on the net), or even the ordinary press, did not cover that
incident too much.
-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
                                      Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Evolving conceptions of "fairness"
Keywords: fairness
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:09:15 GMT
Organization: Matrox Ltd.

The Anglo-Quebecois' conception of "fairness" has evolved a great
deal over time.

First there was the situation after the Conquest: English
immigrants thought it fair for the new administration to prefer
loyal Englishmen over natives of doubtful loyalty and foreign tongue.

Then, Confederation established a regime in which the French and English
would be equal under the law.  The English considered this to
be fair, even if (for whatever reasons) the two societies continued
to evolve separately, one wielding more clout, in practice,
than the other.

When the French found the result unacceptable, and began to make
themselves absolute masters of Quebec, the English decided
that official bilingualism/personal unilingualism would be fair.

However, the Quebecois did not regard this as sufficient.  Because of
the sorry state of French on the continent, French would have to be
the first language of Quebec -- and everyone would have to speak it.
The English who did not leave Quebec decided that was fair enough,
and set about learning French and setting up immersion programs.

Recently, the more radically nationalist Quebecois have decided that
this is not sufficient: French must be the ONLY public language.
English must be confined to the private homes of English Quebecers
de souche.  Law 178, reiterating Law 101, is a partial implementation
of this doctrine. The English do not yet regard this as fair, but in
time, will they come around?

--
Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
Xref: sparky can.politics:5511 can.general:3552
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general
Subject: Re: Olympic Musing
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:13:45 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <Bs3np2.FLJ@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) babbles incoherently 
>Anything that would not have been used during Expo 67 (100th year of Canada)
>and that would be today is propaganda.  In 1967, the war has not yet begin.
                                                     ~~~~~

What war are you talking about? I thought Canada was based on the
domination of the Quebecois (among others) so wouldn't the war
have begun in 1759?

Or are you just babbling again? 

-- 
i.sinature
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: PQ SEPERATION
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 18:32:30 GMT

In article <q9PDoB2w165w@aficom.ocunix.on.ca> franc@aficom.ocunix.on.ca (francoise webster) writes:
>QUITE SIMPLY, IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!

Quebec has to write Canada a cheque for around $100 billion dollars
(plus or minus a few billion depending on the formula) before it can
separate...it will have to raise this money internationally in a
new Quebec currency...this should be a sufficient deterent to
separation.  Canada's (and Quebec's) huge debt basically make
separation a fiscally dubious proposition...

Even if the debt repayment were rescheduled over several years...
it would represent a huge fiscal burden to Quebec and Canada.

Until Canada and Quebec clean up their balance sheets, separation
is basically suicidal for both sides.

Gerald
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: God Save your Queen
Date: 28 Jul 92 02:22:12 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <1992Jul27.171928.23163@bnr.ca> dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton) writes:
>
>BTW, if you want to talk about the past you may recall that it was the Monarchy
>of England that gave the people of Quebec their freedom after they lost the
>war.  You have the language rights and the claim to self government because
>a former Queen gave them to you.  They could have expelled all of the French
>from their soil if they wanted to.  They showed some respect for you, can't you
>show some respect for them?

THEY DID SO in 1755.  DEPORTATION DES ACADIENS!!!!

And the Acadia was a british land since 1713.  They did not repeat in 1763
for an economical reason : it was too much trouble to handle those
NEUTRAL FRENCHes.  ANd they could not kill everybody directly.  Other
colonies would had rebel.

And someone shown me some papers about the 1755 deportation, about the
harm they had.  WOrking like slaves in New England.

I would say that in 1763, they were afraid of some effects on their
American colony.

But don't talk about respect please.

>
>Don


-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Barthelemy Jarret (1471) -> Andre Jarret, sieur de Beauregard (1665)
\_.-===   -> Denis Beauregard (1992)                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Bilingualism at universities (was Re: Bla, bla)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:45:52 GMT

In article <12396@audetf> audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>
>At least McGill (unlike Ottawa U) does not pretend it's bilingual when
>it's not.

As-tu etudie a l'universite d'Ottawa?  Moi je l'ai fait.  Tous les
services dont j'ai eu besoin etaient disponibles en francais.  Les
documents, les formulaires a remplir, etc.  Et si j'ai eu a prendre
quelques cours en anglais, c'est seulement parce qu'il n'y avait pas
assez d'etudiants en informatique pour avoir des cours separes.

Alors, pourquoi affirmes-tu que l'universite d'Ottawa n'est pas
bilingue?

Le Rhealiste - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Parlant pour moi-meme
From: sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca (Stephane Boucher)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Richard Holden & compulsory bi-elections
Date: 27 Jul 92 23:13:40 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal

>>>>> On 27 Jul 92 15:05:52 GMT, steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steven C. Potter) said:
  > X-Bytes: 2077

  > From article <SBO.92Jul24184712@froh.vlsi.polymtl.ca>, by sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca
  > > I tought he said he would not mind to join the PQ in an
  > > independant Quebec because he believe that things would
  > > improve for the anglophones in an independant Quebec...
  > > 
  > > From what I know, he seemed coherent. Whether or not he's
  > > right is another question.
  > > 

  > He has opposed a number of PQ policies, including the
  > limitation of access to English schools. 

You probably know that better than I do.

  > Now he says he
  > would like to join the PQ if Quebec separates.

"Would like" or "wouldn't mind"?

  > He has stated that he does not think the PQ is the best
  > party to look after the interests of the English
  > community in Quebec. Now he says that he thinks the PQ
  > would be the best party to look after the interests of
  > the English community in an independant Quebec.

  >   What is coherent?

Note that he believes (He could be lying, but anyway...)
that things would improve for the lingustic minority in an
independant Quebec.

That said, I'm not trying to defend him.

  > I stated that I thought Richard Holden was the best
  > reason I had seen in a long time for introducing
  > compulsory bi-elections when an elected representative
  > radically changes his position from that for which he
  > was elected. E.g. changing parties or leaving a party to
  > become independant.

What if he does not leave the party just to avoid
bi-election, but does not follow anymore his party?

  > Such radical shifts in position should be challenged in
  > a bi-election.  When an elected representative changes
  > his position so radically from that for which he was
  > elected he should be forced to seek a new mandate.

The problem is that the guy could choose to remain in the
party, and at that point we move from objective
interpretation (leaving party) to subjective interpretation
("radical change in his position from that for which he was
elected"). You could very well not vote for the person, next
time around, if he choose not to respect his word. That way
there maybe a chance that people will keep their word (if
it's possible in politics).

  > Why is there no mechanism to enable constituents to
  > precipitate (for want of a better word) a bi-election?

Probably because it is not feasable, or nobody can agree on
the formula (something very frequent in Canada :-).

God rid us of the stupid Queen!
--
  ,                          ,                           ,
Stephane Boucher, ing. jr. | Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca        | Tel: (514)340-5950
sbo@info.polymtl.ca        | Fax: (514)340-4078