April 11, 2006


For once I will be brief, UNESCO is an international organization where membership is allowed only to countries, not nations, but nation-states.

Quebec cannot get a voice at UNESCO more than Catalonia or Scotland can.

However, allowing an elected provincial representative speak for Canada is not a bad thing. Are provincial ministers not Canadian? Quebec’s culture minister shared time with Canada’s Heritage minister at UNESCO last year. Stephane Dion shared the floor with Alberta’s environment minister at one of the COP 11 sessions. Let me also emphasize this applies to all provinces, not just Quebec. It's called equality for a reason guys.

As long as Ottawa decides who represents the voice of Canada, I am in favor. In fields of provincial jurisdiction, the provinces will have to implement the decisions that the Ottawa-appointed representatives will take, therefore it is only natural that the provinces be consulted. However, when an elected provincial representative speaks for Canada on the international stage, they must always speak for Canada, and the consensus achieved in Canada, not for their province. That must be made clear from the start. The only way to ensure that is to let Ottawa appoint who will speak in international forums.

Charest and Pelletier want the right to appoint the representative. Stephen Harper promised that. He has balked, appointing a Quebec-chosen employee in Paris and keeping the discretion of appointment in Ottawa. Thankfully, he has balked. I do not want Louise Beaudoin speaking for Canada. I do not want André Boisclair speaking for Canada. They would do this country a disservice.

10 Commentaires:

Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

Canada is one country with two cultures. That is the plain, simple truth.

UNESCO est tout simplement l'organisation des Nations Unies concernant l'éducation, la science et la culture. Note la culture. Comme deja dit, au Canada, on a deux cultures. Est-ce que c'est quelque chose mauvaise? Non.

Alors, est-ce que c'est une mauvaise decision d'avoir deux representants de Canada, un pour la culture anglo-canadienne, l'autre pour la culture franco-canadienne? Non.

And on a side note, Catalonia should be allowed to have its own representative at UNESCO, given it has a separate language, culture and history from Spain. Hopefully, if the people decide on independence they will get that chance. However, there is no reason why they shouldn't have one already. The reason they don't is the UN always bows down to pressure from whomever, whether it be democratically-elected officials or war criminals. So faith in the UN should be taken with a grain of salt.

Culture isn't define by borders. La culture est defini par sa peuple.

4/11/2006 9:42 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

Je pense qu'Antonio veut un représentant pour Saint-Léonard.

Marguerite Séparatiste

4/11/2006 9:45 p.m.  
Blogger franco-manitobain à McGill a dit...

Si cette question de l'UNESCO était vraiment au sujet des deux cultures au Canada, la francophonie et l'anglais, pourquoi pas nommer un francophone de l'extérieur du Québec au siège de l'UNESCO?

4/11/2006 10:57 p.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

Well Pat

It's about a pissing contest between the Quebec and federal government.

To me, the federal government should negotiate a common position with the provinces before attending a conference relating to provincial jurisdiction. Whoever goes to state the common consensus doesnt really matter at that point, as long as they speak for Canada.

4/11/2006 11:38 p.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

haha forgot a word

*relating to AREAS of provincial jurisdiction

4/11/2006 11:39 p.m.  
Blogger andrewridgeley a dit...

Two cultures? I've lived in four provinces, including Québec and encountered a lot more than four different cultures. It's a spit in the face of every Acadian, every Quebecer, every aboriginal, every immigrant/ descendant of immigrants who lives in an urban neighbourhood with cultural traits exclusive unto itself, and every Canadian when someone calls this a country with two cultures. Our state represents two languages and observes the right of provinces to implement their own legal systems [namely civil law in Québec], but our society preserves and binds together far more than TWO cultures. That's a horribly misguided statement and it's the kind of logic that leads to bigotry and racism. I recognize the uniqueness of Québec, but no more than that of any other province.

4/12/2006 2:57 a.m.  
Blogger s.b. a dit...

Didn't Ignatieff promise Quebec the same thing in his speech at U of O? Canada's voice represented by a province. I believe in French it was "masters of your own house", a seperatist and highly questionable slogan to choose. Pehaps he even promised more than Mr. HArper since Harper has now balked?

4/12/2006 8:20 a.m.  
Blogger s.b. a dit...

P.S. online memberships are now up and running aka working. So your 70 people can join. Unfortunately $1 student memberships need a credit card for payment. And I would assume that if a credit card is shared and used more than a couple of times those memberships would be challenged. So people need their own credit cards to join on line.

4/12/2006 8:29 a.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...


Maitre Chez nous is the slogan that kicked off the quiet revolution...not separatist

4/12/2006 8:52 a.m.  
Blogger Raphael a dit...

"Maître chez nous" était le slogan du Parti libéral du Québec lors de l'élection provinciale de 1962. "

"Master in our own house" (a poor translation of "Maitre chez nous") was the Liberal slogan for the 1962 provincial election in Quebec...the same party that throw out René lévesque in 1967 for proposing the idea of sovereignety-association...

4/12/2006 5:23 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home