Nation Resolution Implications
I am still writing my paper so I will just take a few minutes to address the Ekos poll about the Quebec nation. The way it sounds is that this resolution, if Frank Graves did his polling properly, will fail miserably in Montreal.
I will say this again. This resolution was supported by the Quebec delegates of all three major leadership camps in Quebec.
Bob Rae’s “I believe in it but refuse to go back into it” position is a ploy to win votes and is not washing well with the media in Quebec. For a man who supported something far more dangerous in 1990, this is a little rich.
This resolution was brought forward by an Ignatieff supporter and amended by a Dion supporter, with a spirit of co-operation because this resolution is not about leadership, but about reconciling a historical fact.
I remind people of what Bob Rae said today, in his op/ed piece
Bob Rae quotes the Cauchon Report…here is the quote he takes from the report.
"By proceeding in a pragmatic, step-by-step way and showing political goodwill, we can send a strong signal to all citizens of Quebec that they can grow, prosper and realize their aspirations within the Canadian federation."
I agree with Martin Cauchon. We need to send signals of goodwill to Quebecers.
How is it a strong signal to Quebec to continue to deny the "fact of life" (Bob's words, not mine) that they are a nation? If you read that Ekos poll correctly, Liberals are saying to NOT send a signal of goodwill.
We continue to deny that Ottawa has too much money due to the necessary cuts in 1995 that were never fully restored. Denying the fiscal imbalance is sending a negative signal to Quebec. (Give Rae credit, at least he supports this one)
Saying the rejection of the constitution unanimously by Quebec City (including the Quebec Liberals) is “mythology” is creating our own mythology. Need I remind you that after this happened; the Liberals were reduced to their worst result ever in the House Of Commons.
Did Bourassa and Mulroney invent the idea that Quebec needed to be brought in then? If that was the case, why did Bob Rae and Stephane Dion support it if it was not necessary?
Supporting a move to bring Quebec into the constitution in 1990 and 1992, but deny that they need to be brought in to begin with is taking a step backwards, thus sending a bad signal to Quebec.
“I do not have a problem with the fact that many Quebecois feel themselves part of a "nation" in the sense of a community of interest affected by a shared history, language, culture and geography. No Canadian should feel threatened by that, any more than we are by people describing themselves as part of the Welsh nation, the Scottish nation, the Metis nation, the Cree nation or any similar assertions of identity.”
If you don’t have a problem with the concept, then vote to create a task force. Let the task force talk to Quebecers and do its work. Let them hit the ground running and find out why 85% of Quebecers believe Quebec is nation and find out what they believe that concept to be. Let them make recommendations to our leader and let the burden fall on him whether or not to act on it. Do not dismiss this act of goodwill, this olive branch that the Liberals send to Quebecers. Send the right message to Quebec Bob. Vote in favour of this resolution.
I will say this again. This resolution was supported by the Quebec delegates of all three major leadership camps in Quebec.
Bob Rae’s “I believe in it but refuse to go back into it” position is a ploy to win votes and is not washing well with the media in Quebec. For a man who supported something far more dangerous in 1990, this is a little rich.
This resolution was brought forward by an Ignatieff supporter and amended by a Dion supporter, with a spirit of co-operation because this resolution is not about leadership, but about reconciling a historical fact.
I remind people of what Bob Rae said today, in his op/ed piece
Bob Rae quotes the Cauchon Report…here is the quote he takes from the report.
"By proceeding in a pragmatic, step-by-step way and showing political goodwill, we can send a strong signal to all citizens of Quebec that they can grow, prosper and realize their aspirations within the Canadian federation."
I agree with Martin Cauchon. We need to send signals of goodwill to Quebecers.
How is it a strong signal to Quebec to continue to deny the "fact of life" (Bob's words, not mine) that they are a nation? If you read that Ekos poll correctly, Liberals are saying to NOT send a signal of goodwill.
We continue to deny that Ottawa has too much money due to the necessary cuts in 1995 that were never fully restored. Denying the fiscal imbalance is sending a negative signal to Quebec. (Give Rae credit, at least he supports this one)
Saying the rejection of the constitution unanimously by Quebec City (including the Quebec Liberals) is “mythology” is creating our own mythology. Need I remind you that after this happened; the Liberals were reduced to their worst result ever in the House Of Commons.
Did Bourassa and Mulroney invent the idea that Quebec needed to be brought in then? If that was the case, why did Bob Rae and Stephane Dion support it if it was not necessary?
Supporting a move to bring Quebec into the constitution in 1990 and 1992, but deny that they need to be brought in to begin with is taking a step backwards, thus sending a bad signal to Quebec.
“I do not have a problem with the fact that many Quebecois feel themselves part of a "nation" in the sense of a community of interest affected by a shared history, language, culture and geography. No Canadian should feel threatened by that, any more than we are by people describing themselves as part of the Welsh nation, the Scottish nation, the Metis nation, the Cree nation or any similar assertions of identity.”
If you don’t have a problem with the concept, then vote to create a task force. Let the task force talk to Quebecers and do its work. Let them hit the ground running and find out why 85% of Quebecers believe Quebec is nation and find out what they believe that concept to be. Let them make recommendations to our leader and let the burden fall on him whether or not to act on it. Do not dismiss this act of goodwill, this olive branch that the Liberals send to Quebecers. Send the right message to Quebec Bob. Vote in favour of this resolution.
par / by Anthony à / at 10:48 a.m.
3 Commentaires:
Fuddle Duddle is rather befuddled on the issue of nationhood enshrinement for Quebec in the constitution.
It is amusing to watch Fuddle's twists and turns on this petard the Ignatieff supporters have hoisted themselves on. Fuddle's contortions almost fival Cerebus' pretzel-arguments.
Facts are facts, as ed king so clearly called Fuddles on.
And the facts show that Ignatieff threw the dice by recommending constitutional change to enshrine a vague, ill-defined notion of "nation" in the constitution for one province, and now does not know how to exit gracefully from the mess he has created.
The Cat has a word of advice for Ignatieff and his supporters: sometimes just doing the same thing over and over again does not lead to different results.
Perhaps Ignatieff should try withdrawing the Quebec motion, in the interests of party unity and the need to win power in the next election.
Wow, a resolution on Quebec's totally special awesomeness passed with support from delegates supporting all candidates? Amazing. I think we should hold provincial meetings in Toronto, Calgary, and Iqalit and see if we can't get cross-candidate support for resolutions concerning Toronto's, Alberta's, and Nunavut's totally super-special awesomeness.
which of the painfully obvious facts - that this resolution is incredibly divisive, nationally damaging, and ultimately pointless - do you not understand?
Why on God's green earth would someone NOT from Quebec support it, except for the completely selfish and morally repugnant objective of gaining votes on a promise they have no intention of fulfilling?
I would respectfully suggest that the resolution should be withdrawn by the authors.
It will be a huge liability for the Liberal party in a federal election and for whoever becomes the leader.
Here is the path to success
1. Withdraw the resolution
2. Elect the leader
3. Win the federal election
4. Work to improve relations with Quebec
The alternative is the path to failure
1. Have the resolution defeated at the national convention
2. Elect a leader for a divided and bitter party
3. Lose the federal election because significant numbers of Liberals sit on the sidelines
4. Remain in opposition, repeating the same mistakes for 5 or 10 years.
Post a Comment
<< Home