According to Statistics Canada, unemployment rates for immigrants living in Québec in 2006 were significantly higher than for immigrants in any other province. For very recent immigrants, the unemployment rate in Québec was an estimated 17.8%. This was nearly three times as large as the Canadian-born unemployment rate in Québec (6.3%). For recent immigrants, the unemployment rate was still more than double the Canadian-born rate in Québec (13.4% vs. 6.3%). Such hard evidence doesn't lie; the Québécois are racists. That's what some people want to believe and it's kind of hard to argue.
Still, my personal experience is that Québec's society is generally curious and welcoming for minorities. I mean... that's what those I've met in school, at work or in my leisure time have been telling me. Although I've seen some discontent, I've never experienced it up close. Of course, there's the occasional "maudit [fill in the blank]!" here and there, but most of the time, it's more along the lines of an aggravating "Fatso!" than a true racist slur. I think the average Jean-Guy is more exuberant than the average Doug.
The Bouchard-Taylor hearings?... xenophobic you say?... maybe. But the media mostly focused on the controversy and some testimonies were consistent with my personal observations. Most clashes presented at the hearings were religious based, not of the racial type or out of fear of the stranger. Having booted the Catholic Church stronghold out of the public place less than 50 years ago, the Québécois know exactly where religion, whichever one, can lead some people.
The Québécois are worried about the 'purity' of their lineage?.... not sure either. Most have Amerind blood running down their veins and don't seem to mind it. In 2006, the Québécois, with a smaller population, adopted a third more non-Caucasian babies than Ontarians.
Intolerant?... probably not. In 2006, five census metropolitan areas had police-reported rates of hate-motivated crime that were well above the national average of 3.1 per 100,000 population. Calgary led with a rate of 9.1 incidents for every 100,000 population, followed by Kingston (8.5), Ottawa (6.6), London (5.9) and Toronto (5.5). Provincial comparisons of hate crime were limited to Québec, Ontario and British Columbia. Ontario was highest at 4.1 incidents per 100,000 population, followed by British Columbia (2.5) and Québec (1.4).
Immigrant unemployment rates is hard evidence that the Québécois are racists?... perhaps, but that's not the only explanation. Signed in 1991, the Canada-Québec Accord came on the heels of the failure of the Meech Lake Accord and largely accomplished what would have taken place in the area of immigration had Meech Lake passed. Similar agreements followed for other provinces, but the Canada-Québec Accord gives the province the most latitude. Is it possible that federal civil services are doing a better job at finding immigrant skills for the market needs?
2009/08/30
2009/08/23
We love minority governments
According to a poll published in yesterday's La Presse [Google translation], 29.7% of Québec's residents have a positive appreciation of the work that has been done by the three consecutive minority governments we've had since 2004. Based on a national average of 18.5%, the corresponding average in other provinces is at 15.2%. Compared to the rest of the country, Québec's support for a minority government is almost double. This discrepancy could be explained by Québec voters' liking for a federal government having to cope with the Bloc's demands to carry on. This perspective is in sharp contrast to a Canadian Press report by Jennifer Ditchburn titled "Canadians grow weary of minority government" published by The Globe and Mail on July 13th, 2009.
Never, since the merging of the Progressive Conservative and Reform parties in 2003, has the Bloc's pertinence in Ottawa been so blatant to the Québécois. In the ten years that preceded that merger, Canada's natural governing party achieved majority simply because right-wing votes were divided.
The future is bleak for Canadians looking forward to a majority government. Some have already recognized the hurdle the Bloc has become and are juggling with ideas to limit its reach. In a column titled "Knock a chip off the old Bloc" published by The Globe and Mail on August 15th, 2009, Andrew Stark questions the party-allowance formula. He submits that the principle of federalism could take precedence over popular votes. In order to get an allowance, for example, a party could need to have elected representatives in a minimum number of provinces. Isn't ironic to think that the party-allowance formula, aimed at cleaning up political practices, was inspired from a Québec legislation introduced by René Lévesque himself?
Along with the sovereignty movement, the Bloc has been boasting the democratic path it has chosen. Many obviously don't agree with its purpose, but most have behaved as though they recognized its legitimacy since it was created in 1991. Now that the Bloc's presence in Ottawa has finally gotten some people scratching their heads, someone thinks that changing the rules, in lieu of addressing the root cause, would help federalism in Québec and Canadian unity? I think not.
What on Earth is wrong with Canadians? Don't they realize that the Québécois aren't satisfied with the federal status quo?... that the majority of those who voted "yes" in 1995 aren't bluenecks, but good citizens contemplating a democratic alternative to the status quo?... that the vast majority of Québécois would be interested in an alternative other than sovereignty?... that such an alternative can only come from Ottawa?... that they are the ones holding the key to the sovereignty movement's demise?... that the sovereignty movement is as legitimate as the thrust that made Canada into a sovereign state in 1867?... that they need to understand what motivates the Québécois in order to address it properly?... that they can't simply shove the whole idea by the way side?
Come on Canadians... aren't you tired of being politically strangled by a province? Apart from a few lows, support for sovereignty has remained above the 40% mark and has plagued federal politics for the last 30 years. It's an intrinsic part of the political landscape. It's not going to simply fade away! Is the great Canadian tolerance mere indifference? What are you waiting to give the sovereigntist's proposal a balanced democratic response that would steer voters away?
Never, since the merging of the Progressive Conservative and Reform parties in 2003, has the Bloc's pertinence in Ottawa been so blatant to the Québécois. In the ten years that preceded that merger, Canada's natural governing party achieved majority simply because right-wing votes were divided.
The future is bleak for Canadians looking forward to a majority government. Some have already recognized the hurdle the Bloc has become and are juggling with ideas to limit its reach. In a column titled "Knock a chip off the old Bloc" published by The Globe and Mail on August 15th, 2009, Andrew Stark questions the party-allowance formula. He submits that the principle of federalism could take precedence over popular votes. In order to get an allowance, for example, a party could need to have elected representatives in a minimum number of provinces. Isn't ironic to think that the party-allowance formula, aimed at cleaning up political practices, was inspired from a Québec legislation introduced by René Lévesque himself?
Along with the sovereignty movement, the Bloc has been boasting the democratic path it has chosen. Many obviously don't agree with its purpose, but most have behaved as though they recognized its legitimacy since it was created in 1991. Now that the Bloc's presence in Ottawa has finally gotten some people scratching their heads, someone thinks that changing the rules, in lieu of addressing the root cause, would help federalism in Québec and Canadian unity? I think not.
What on Earth is wrong with Canadians? Don't they realize that the Québécois aren't satisfied with the federal status quo?... that the majority of those who voted "yes" in 1995 aren't bluenecks, but good citizens contemplating a democratic alternative to the status quo?... that the vast majority of Québécois would be interested in an alternative other than sovereignty?... that such an alternative can only come from Ottawa?... that they are the ones holding the key to the sovereignty movement's demise?... that the sovereignty movement is as legitimate as the thrust that made Canada into a sovereign state in 1867?... that they need to understand what motivates the Québécois in order to address it properly?... that they can't simply shove the whole idea by the way side?
Come on Canadians... aren't you tired of being politically strangled by a province? Apart from a few lows, support for sovereignty has remained above the 40% mark and has plagued federal politics for the last 30 years. It's an intrinsic part of the political landscape. It's not going to simply fade away! Is the great Canadian tolerance mere indifference? What are you waiting to give the sovereigntist's proposal a balanced democratic response that would steer voters away?
Canadian movies - Part 2
Having raked in more than $9M in less than two months, "De père en flic" (Father and Guns) is Québec's top blockbuster this year. The homegrown comedy beat "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" and other box office giants. Chances are it's going to keep the top spot for the whole year.
Canadians in other provinces aren't too keen on homegrown flicks and much prefer foreign movies. Homegrown productions account for approximately 1% at the English Canadian box office. The fact that "De père en flic" has remained four weeks in the Canadian top 10 (it's still in the top 20) without a mention in national media illustrates that trend rather well.
Ironically, according to La Presse [Google translation], the movie's success hasn't gone unnoticed in Hollywood and a producer has expressed interest in a remake. Well... it looks like Canadians in other province might enjoy the Québécois movie in the near future after all.
Canadians in other provinces aren't too keen on homegrown flicks and much prefer foreign movies. Homegrown productions account for approximately 1% at the English Canadian box office. The fact that "De père en flic" has remained four weeks in the Canadian top 10 (it's still in the top 20) without a mention in national media illustrates that trend rather well.
Ironically, according to La Presse [Google translation], the movie's success hasn't gone unnoticed in Hollywood and a producer has expressed interest in a remake. Well... it looks like Canadians in other province might enjoy the Québécois movie in the near future after all.
2009/08/16
Sovereigntist tokenism
Maintaining a balance between the integration of immigrants and welcoming different cultures is a constant challenge for any society struggling with its demographic decline. Political parties of all stripes recognize the value of having immigrants among their ranks. Opponents sometimes question the good faith of their political adversaries when they succeed in recruiting candidates of foreign origins for office. Opponents sometimes accuse their political adversaries of tokenism, the inclusion of members of a minority group to create a false appearance of inclusive practices.
Achieving tokenism obviously calls for members of minority groups to be willing to take part of it, individuals who either don't have much of an opinion, who lack wits or who are simply dishonest. It also requires some sort of winning recipe that allows political parties to have these individuals elected. And finally, it needs the population to fall for it.
Societies with generally low levels of education and in which information to the public is controlled may be fertile ground for tokenism, but Canadians are among the privileged few when it comes to access and quality of education and information. Can Canadians be massively fooled by token characters with reduced capacity?... seriously? With our political system, an accusation of tokenism mostly sounds like an insult to the voters and the candidate they've elected.
When it comes to recruiting candidates of foreign origins, the sovereignty movement faces a challenge. Parizeau's faux pas in 1995 (see Parizeau is racist) has been cultivated as one of many demonstrations of intolerance (see Québec's ethnocentric nationalism - Part 2). Many Canadians are under the impression that the sovereignty movement doesn't accept anything but old-stock Québécois. In reality, it greets people of all origins and backgrounds.
Bernard Cleary (of Aboriginal descent), Marie Malavoy (born in Germany), Alexis Wawanoloath (of Aboriginal descent), Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac (born in Vietnam), Maria Mourani (of Lebanese origin), Joseph Facal (born in Uruguay), Vivian Barbot (born in Haiti) and Maka Kotto (born in Cameroun) have all been elected as Parti Québécois MNAs or Bloc MPs. The most outspoken individuals in this select club (Maria Mourani, Joseph Facal, Vivian Barbot and Maka Kotto, for example) can hardly be mistaken for token characters with reduced capacity.
Granted, the sovereignty movement will never appeal to immigrants at levels comparable to those found among old-stock Québécois. Several factors may explain this. Some of these new-stock Québécois are restricted to national media to forge their initial political opinions on the subject; most of these media lack the diversity of opinion available in Québec (see National media suffice). But mostly, many of these new-stock Québécois came to Canada fleeing unstable political states and simply couldn't care less for the confusion that may accompany Québec's transition to sovereignty.
Be they sitting in the House of Commons or driving a cab, members of a minority group who embrace the sovereignty movement have overcome several hurdles. I believe people should try listening to what they have to say before dismissing their contribution as tokenism.
Achieving tokenism obviously calls for members of minority groups to be willing to take part of it, individuals who either don't have much of an opinion, who lack wits or who are simply dishonest. It also requires some sort of winning recipe that allows political parties to have these individuals elected. And finally, it needs the population to fall for it.
Societies with generally low levels of education and in which information to the public is controlled may be fertile ground for tokenism, but Canadians are among the privileged few when it comes to access and quality of education and information. Can Canadians be massively fooled by token characters with reduced capacity?... seriously? With our political system, an accusation of tokenism mostly sounds like an insult to the voters and the candidate they've elected.
When it comes to recruiting candidates of foreign origins, the sovereignty movement faces a challenge. Parizeau's faux pas in 1995 (see Parizeau is racist) has been cultivated as one of many demonstrations of intolerance (see Québec's ethnocentric nationalism - Part 2). Many Canadians are under the impression that the sovereignty movement doesn't accept anything but old-stock Québécois. In reality, it greets people of all origins and backgrounds.
Bernard Cleary (of Aboriginal descent), Marie Malavoy (born in Germany), Alexis Wawanoloath (of Aboriginal descent), Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac (born in Vietnam), Maria Mourani (of Lebanese origin), Joseph Facal (born in Uruguay), Vivian Barbot (born in Haiti) and Maka Kotto (born in Cameroun) have all been elected as Parti Québécois MNAs or Bloc MPs. The most outspoken individuals in this select club (Maria Mourani, Joseph Facal, Vivian Barbot and Maka Kotto, for example) can hardly be mistaken for token characters with reduced capacity.
Granted, the sovereignty movement will never appeal to immigrants at levels comparable to those found among old-stock Québécois. Several factors may explain this. Some of these new-stock Québécois are restricted to national media to forge their initial political opinions on the subject; most of these media lack the diversity of opinion available in Québec (see National media suffice). But mostly, many of these new-stock Québécois came to Canada fleeing unstable political states and simply couldn't care less for the confusion that may accompany Québec's transition to sovereignty.
Be they sitting in the House of Commons or driving a cab, members of a minority group who embrace the sovereignty movement have overcome several hurdles. I believe people should try listening to what they have to say before dismissing their contribution as tokenism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
