HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Friday, 28 Aug 1992 22:46:16 EDT
From: Bob Burge <BURGER@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: asymmetrical federalism
Distribution: can

In article <1992Aug27.194008.1402@csi.uottawa.ca>, mfrappie@csi.uottawa.ca (Marc
Frappier) says:
>
>Why is asymmetrical federalism so unacceptable to the rest of Canada?
>Why is the devolution of powers to Quebec perceived as a "privilege"?
>
Should not all provinces have the same set of powers?  Isn't it enough that
provinces can pass legislation "notwithstanding" certain elements in the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms?  Why should the Quebecois be subjected to
more "government" than the rest of us?

Bob Burge                                  Internet: burger@qucdn.queensu.ca
Opinion Research Unit - Queen's University - Kingston - ON - Canada - K7L3N6
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Access to English school: quotes
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:27:13 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Thomas Hood) writes:
]Given the fact that the anglophone population of Quebec is declining
]faster than the francophone population, rules that allow the English
]community to assimilate a lower proportion of immigrants (I.E. none)
]than their proportion of the population imply that the English community
]is less worthy of preservation.  That's discrimination.  Franco-Quebecois
]rights of survival do not detract from the same Anglo-Quebecois rights.

It depends if you see this as the right of the people or the nature of
the society. I view Quebec as a francophone society, with a sizable
english minority that has a lot of privileges for a minority (i.e.,
services, hospitals, education in english, etc.). Therefore, according
to that logic, it is normal that immigrants go to french schools. No
one would say that England is racist because if you move there, you
are expected to speak english. The difference here is the importance
of the minority, and the rights it acquired.

]Or do they?  If you think so, then say so explicitly, Frederic and others.
]Not wanting to speak for him and Denis, I can still say that many
]nationalists do seem to believe that it would be "no loss" if the English
]Quebecers were eliminated.  They imply it when they speak of 300 million
](indistinguishable) English-speakers.  They suggest it when they describe
]all the English as bigots, and that is why we have discriminatory
]laws today.

Of course it would be a lost, just like the extinction of the
franco-americans and the near-extinction of the francophones-
hors-Quebec.

]With all due respect, however, it is not their decision to make, and so
]long as they continue to discriminate against the English in this way,
]there will be no peace in Quebec... only fatigue.

If this is discrimination, then not having spanish schools for all
children is also discrimination.
-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach)
Subject: Re: Tom Gray who is ra*
Originator: labach@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:59:22 GMT
Organization: The Bobby Jurasin Fan Club

In article <BtLD6z.454@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
(Denis Beauregard) writes: 
> >Well Denis has not been able to reply so I hope we have seen the
> >last of his Canada bashing posts with references to Anglo
> >"Master Races" like the "NAZIs"
> 
> You forget, in your racist limited mind, that this was in a response
> to a posting comparing the Quebec laws to South Africa's.

I'm sure he didn't really mean that Quebec's laws were like South
Africa's.

======================================================================
"HANOI (Reuter) - Police are removing shop and bar signs in Ho Chi Minh
 City, in a crackdown against unauthorized advertising, residents said
 Tuesday.
   "The crackdown seemed aimed mainly at signs in English or other foreign
 languages, residents said.
   "The government began enforcing a rule that all outdoor ads be in
 Vietnamese or display Vietnamese words more prominently than foreign
 words."
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Access to English school: quotes
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:42:18 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 2610

From article <plante.715113702@iros1>, by plante@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Frederic Plante):
> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
> 
>>Here are a few interesting quotes on my central theme:-

  These quotes included Claude Ryan's attemt to justify restrictions
  in Bill 101 - you chose to ignore that.

> 
> 
> [Some quotes deleted]
> 
> 
>>   Recommendation #1 of the Chambers' Task Force on English
>>   Education in Quebec.:-
> 
>>   "THAT THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION RECOMMEND TO THE GOVERNMENT
>>    OF QUEBEC THAT access to education in English be widened at
>>    least to include any child who was being educated in English
>>    or who has a parent from an English-speaking part of the world."
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>>                          [Submitted February 5th, 1992]
> 
> By quoting this, I suppose you agree with it. 

  It is a step in the right direction.

  Quoting somebody doesn't mean one agrees, necessarily, at all. One
  may be testing or provoking other peoples reactions.

  What do you think the nationalist reaction would have been to a
  report calling for total freedom of choice?

> 
> So, you insult quebecois because they support discrimination based on
> the education of the parents on the question of accessibility of english
> schools, 

  I'm sorry if those people feel insulted because I don't like their
  discriminatory attitudes. 

> yet you would support discrimination based on country of origin,

  I am in favour of total freedom of choice.

  I do not support discrimination.

  I see the Chambers' Task Force recommendation as a step in the right
  direction.

> which, IMHO, is worst (think about it, all immigrants now have the
> same rights as the majority in Quebec; should we change the law to do
> this, an immigrant from, say, Germany, would not have the same rights
> as one from the U.K. or the US.).

  Is this any different from the current law which does this: an English
  family from, say, England, does not have the same rights as one whose
  parents were educated in English in Canada?

  That sounds like "discrimination based on country of origin" to me.

  Thank you for your support! :-)

> 
> So, Mr Potter, aren't you as racist and fascist as you say we are?
> 

  Obviously not.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Xref: sparky can.politics:6249 mtl.general:228
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Denied access to English schools?
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:02:26 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <BtK0wC.Kt8@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> gordon@madmax.uwaterloo.ca (Gordon R. Strachan) writes:
>In article <BtJvLD.I18@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug25.085646.12416@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>>>From article <1992Aug25.063838.25321@cc.umontreal.ca>, by dignard@ERE.UMontreal.CA  Michel Dignard waxes:-
>>
>>7 millions of francos where assimilated and humiliated because of
>>illegal laws in Western Canada.  We just don't care about your silly
>>problem.
>>
>
>Just out of curiosity could you please tell me when there were ever 7 million
>French speaking people in western Canada?  Even for you this statement is
>pretty outrageous.
>

If the western provinces had been bilingual in 1870-1900, the migration
to USA would have been directed to west and we would have get more French
in West and less in USA.  There are some 14 millions descendants of French
in North America.  6 millions in Quebec, let's presume 1 or 2 millions out
of Quebec still speaking French, and we get 6 or 7 more millions who could
have kept the French language without the anti-French laws (that were
found illegal 100 years after).

>>
>>We don't care.  Quebec is not yet part in the 1982 constitution.
>>
>
>This is actually wrong.  Quebec *IS* part of the 1982 constitution because
>it is part of Canada.  If you don't except that logic then ask yourself this
>how did Bourasa envoke the not-with-standing clause if Quebec isn't part of
>the constitution.  This idea that Quebec never signed the constitution is
>a facilacy started by Mulroney.  No province ever signed the constitution.
>In fact, the only Canadian names that are on the constitution are all French
>names from Quebec.
>
In 1982, there was some signed agreement without Quebec signature for
constitution rapatriement.  I can't believe Mulroney invented this and
no media tried to show it was false.  Tom Box could probably find some
details on this.

>Gordon


-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Vient de paraitre : Andre Jarret et ses Ancetres
\_.-===  En vente par l'auteur                      Opinions ? Et pis non !
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Les interets collectifs
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 20:56:18 GMT

In article <plante.715372664@iros1> plante@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Frederic Plante) writes:
>
>Mais ce qui m'enerve le plus, c'est la rhetorique utilisee par les groupes
>de pressions anglophones, tres bien illustree par M. Potter.  Ils utilisent
>la notion sacro-sainte de droits individuels pour defendre la notion
>de libre-choix de la langue d'enseignement (libre-choix?  et l'immigrant
>polonais, lui, il a le libre-choix?), quand, finalement, il est evident
>qu'ils defendent les interets collectifs de la communaute anglophone
>(empecher le declin du reseau scolaire).

Ce qui s'oppose, bien sur, aux efforts de ceux qui defendent les
interets collectifs de la communaute francophone.  Les uns valent-ils
plus que les autres?

Je sais ce que va dire Denis - la communaute francophone est la
majorite, donc elle a raison.  Par contre, il critique fortement la
decision de la majorite anglophone protestante au Manitoba, il y a 100
ans, d'avoir voulu proteger "democratiquement" leur "interets
collectifs", en tentant d'imposer un "visage anglais" a leur province.

Le Rhealiste - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Parlant pour moi-meme
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Quebec law : : S.A. law re school access
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:10:19 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <1992Sep1.105439.22995@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> pierre@chaos.phys.ualberta.ca (Pierre Rouleau) writes:
]In article <1992Aug31.184408.28431@meadow.uucp> marc@meadow.uucp
](Marc Riehm) writes:
]] I submit that there is _nothing_ in any region of Canada which
]] even remotely approaches the conditions of Apartheid or the
]] Nazis' excesses.  Law 101 included.
]] 
]] People should think very carefully before making such
]] comparisons, because they serve to trivialize the
]] horrors of the concentration camps and the
]] killings and institutionalized injustice in South Africa.
]
]AAAhhhhhh! How good it felt to read this. Now I know, after
]several months of making a strong appeal in a post entitled
]"On exaggeration" which ran along your lines, that I am not
]alone...

I also agree with this.

Also, exagerations (like the Apartheid, Nazi, Racist, opression, etc.)
take away any credibility from the rest of the posting.


-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: suzanne@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (Suzanne McCaffrey)
Subject: Re: Canada and Boer War (was Re: History of North America)
Organization: San Francisco State University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:17:09 GMT

since coming to california, the mind has turned to mush and the
canadian library has gathered dust and ocean salt.

but this reference to the boer war, en anglais, brings to mind
the book LA GUERRE, YES SIR by ROCH CARRIER, published in anglais
by ANANSI Press.

i was lucky enuff to have worked on pro-war books, writ by
would-be admirals as well as LA GUERRE (also noted for being one
of the national known "joual", and being from neither culture was
inclined to LA GUERRE and its aversion to anglo wars (and wars
generally).

the circumstances of participation by canadians in and against
the boer war (and later WW1), were markedly deliniated by ethnic
heritage.

and from this now american perspective, unofficial sanction by
sir oliver north's would not have been unappreciated.

you guys up there are worthy of ouyr guys down here. bonne
chance and see you in the wake of NAFTA.
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: asymmetrical federalism
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:07:05 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
]They why are you a sovereignist...Quebec's per capita provincial debt
]is worse than Alberta, BC, and Ontario...if it were to separate, it
]would have a worse debt burden than the rest of Canada per capita,
]and separation would undoubtedly cause interest rates in Canada and
]Quebec to be higher and perhaps significantly higher, making that
]debt even more burdensome.

By the time it separates, Ontario's debt per capita will be much
higher. In fact, the way it's going right now, it will only take a few
years.

]As an independent nation, and not a provincial government, Quebec Inc.
]would be put out of business by both GATT and NAFTA.

You have anything to back this up? Examples?


-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: joeisham@sdf.lonestar.org (Joe Isham)
Subject: Re: more on rep.by pop.
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:59:36 GMT

In article <26AUG92.09704531.0073@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA> writes:
: If I had my way, we would adopt the system used for apportioning
: seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.  (I know that borrowing
: anything from south of the border will seem like sacrilege to many
: Canadian nationalists, but it's a much fairer system than what we
: use.)  For a House of Commons of 300 MPs, this would give the following:
: Nfld 6, PEI 2, NS 10, NB 8, Que 75, Ont 110, Man 12, Sask 11, Alta 28,
: BC 36, NWT 1, Yukon 1  (using 1991 census data).

Amazing... that would give Quebec 25% of the seats in the House of
Commons, just like the latest constitutional proposal...

: Tom Box
: CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA

-- 
_ __/|  Joe Isham - joeisham@sdf.lonestar.org, joeisham@chinet.chi.il.us
\'o.O|  
=(___)= "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!"
   U         -- Arthur Carlson, "WKRP in Cincinnati"
Xref: sparky can.politics:6191 soc.culture.canada:6091
From: michele@catnix.UUCP (Michele Simond)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Absolute Madness... Naturally.
Date: 22 Aug 92 16:14:48 GMT
Organization: Rhinoceros, chargez!

jstewart@alfred.carleton.ca (John Stewart) writes:

>"Why can't we just forget about our constitutional problems and go canoeing?"

This is the best proposal ever.


--
Michele Simond ...... Traductrice ......  B.P.: michele@catnix.UUCP
(514) 671-8820				   OU :	michele%catnix@cam.org

"L'or est le socle du savoir, le trone de la sagesse; mais si vous
confondez le socle et le savoir, il tombe sur vous et vous ecrase."
Xref: sparky can.politics:6436 can.general:4285
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Thursday, 3 Sep 1992 23:17:08 EDT
From: Bob Burge <BURGER@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general
Subject:    Just Can't Wait To Vote!

Don't know about the rest of you, but I just can't wait to vote on October 26!
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: A bilingual West
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:10:33 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <12728@audetf> audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>
>There was an exodus of "french canadians" to the states in the darker
>years. While in the States a few weeks ago I read an article on the
>ethnic background of americans. The numbers where something like:
>
>German - 14%
>English - 11%
>Irish - 10%
>...
>French - 4%
>French-Canadian - 1.4%
>
>My memory is not perfect, so there migh be some slight variation in
>the numbers (I still have the article however). What I do remember is
>that German was the highest. I also remember that 1.4% were
>"french-canadians", which translates to about 3.5 millions. There were
>virtually no english-canadian (labelled as "canadian" in the article)
>background.

Il y a des statistiques sur les racines que les gens pensent avoir
et des donnees sur l'immigration.  Comme genealogiste, j'ai vu
qu'un grand nombre de descendants de quebecois pensaient etre
d'origine francaise.  De plus, le Quebec se trouve a etre une
etape entre la France et les Etats-Unis.  Donc, le 1.4% doit etre
plus eleve.  J'ai vu des chiffres de 1931 (donc, pour des descendants
de 1re et 2me generations surtout, le gros de l'exode etant 1860-1900)
et le nombre de franco-americains d'origine quebecoise est de l'ordre de
grandeur de la population du Quebec.

Il y a aussi des canadiens qui sont des francophones.

Pour resumer, il faudrait voir la source de l'information avant
de l'interpreter.  Moi, j'ai vu des chiffres sur l'immigration de
Francais directement vers les Etats-Unis au siecle dernier, et c'est
tres peu compare aux Quebecois (quelque chose comme 2000 contre 50000 ou
100000 pour certaines decades).


-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Un Quebec renouvele dans une Amerique renovee
\_.-===                                                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
From: heath@mprgate.mpr.ca (Gordon Heath)
Subject: Re: Future "Projections"
Reply-To: heath@mprgate.mpr.ca (Gordon Heath)
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd.
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 02:23:18 GMT

In article <1992Aug29.152604.11596@ccs.QueensU.CA>, hallin@QueensU.CA (Aksel L. Hallin) writes:
|> 
|> I have a hard time understanding why people are so concerned about 
|> representation in the House of Commons.  Except for selecting the 
|> Prime Minister, and providing a group out of which ministers are selected,
|> the House is basically symbolic.  I cannot recall an instance when house
|> acted independently of the government- have bills passed that orginate on
|> the floor?  Or has the government been unable to pass legislation that it
|> desired.  Very infrequently, if at all.

Yes, the executive branch is very powerful, and perhaps too powerful. 
But the Prime Minister and Cabinet cannot pass legislation without the consent
of Parliament. And MPs and Senators have the ability to exert pressure
for changes to legislation. 

|> 	The fact is that in our system the executive branch is essentially
|> all powerful, and that within the government there is neither representation
|> by population or by region.  (Although both factors enter into it's election. )
|> 

By convention, positions within the Federal Cabinet are influenced heavily by
a need for regional and population based representation.
Some people argue that "merit" should be the only consideration,
but I believe that both are important factors in selection.
I would be quite interested if anyone could prove that one or more
regions have been consistently discriminated against in terms of their
representation in the Federal cabinet.

Governments do sometimes have difficulty in ensuring regional representation
in cabinet, if the governing party elects few MPs from a region. This is a 
direct result of our "single member plurality" system of voting which could
be addressed by introducing some degree and form of "proportional representation".
This reform does not require a change to the constitution.

I find your allegations that Quebec always runs Canada to be an outragious
exaggeration, although they have certainly have been doing quite well
as a source of Prime Ministers and have consistently voted with the "trend"
and are therefore consistently well represented on the government side
of the House of Commons.

|> Aksel 
----------------------------
Gord Heath           - Opinions are my own.
From: cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: A bilingual West
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 14:40:09 GMT

In article <BttnHG.MIv@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>In article <28AUG92.15383525.0083@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94) writes:
>>
>>Since the total population of the Prairie Provinces is now about
>>4.5 million, I think Denis's figure of 7 million francophones in a
>>bilingual West is a little on the high side, even given the legendary
>>procreative powers of pre-Quiet Revolution French Canadians.
>>
>>
>My 7 millions is the number of descendants of Quebecois of French origin
>and not speaking French now as a mother language.  If half of migration
>has been directed to west, west would have been francophone and migration
>from Europe would have had a different effect.

People who COULD have gone west are irrelevant.  You've tried to blame
anglophones for evils, and said that they eliminated the Francophone
population in the west.  NOBODY eradicated the 7 million western
francophones that never existed.

If more Quebecois had gone west, then the country would certainly have
a different make-up.  But they DIDN'T.

Blame the English Canada of the 1800s for making laws forbidding
francophones from moving from Quebec to Alberta if you like.  You'll
have a hard time finding any such law.

Blame the clerics that ran Quebec at that time for not telling their
people to settle the west.  (A FAR more likely source of "blame.")
Too bad that this option involves accusing francophones of wrongdoing.


-- 
Christopher Browne
cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca
University of Ottawa
Master of System Science Program
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: How did you interpret the 1980 Referendum?
Date: 4 Sep 92 13:17:30 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 463


  The 1980 Referendum in Quebec.

  What was your understanding of the result?

  Let's see how many different interpretations are out there
  on this one.



-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||