Je m'excuse

Editor's note: this post is an excerpt of a memoir written by Jonathan Kay, editor-in-chief of The Walrus. Click here to read his complete and touching testimony.

To be an Anglo in Quebec during the 1980s was to be born into a multiply nested counterculture. I was a Jew within the Anglo community, an Anglo within Quebec, a Quebecer within English-speaking Canada, and a Canadian within an American-dominated continent. It was a status that imparted to us an inborn suspicion of all things mainstream - including the arena-rock hair bands that we saw on MuchMusic. I felt a closer cultural kinship with Claude Rajotte than with Erica Ehm or Steve Anthony, whether I was watching him on MusiquePlus in French or listening to him on CHOM–FM in English. Despite all my language bigotry, I found myself buying French albums during my trips to Dutchy’s (including, yes, Mitsou).

Sometimes, I’d watch sports in French - the cultural attitudes of the commentators often seemed closer to my own than did the hayseed Canadiana of Howie Meeker and Don Cherry. On school trips to Quebec City and Ottawa, I came to appreciate - on some level, at least - that the uneasy cohabitation of French and English was essential to the creation of a Canadian identity. Standing on the Plains of Abraham, you realize that history feels more real in Quebec than it does in many other parts of the country: the waxing and waning of English and French powers vis-à-vis one another has no counterpart beyond the province’s borders. [...]

Even now, as someone who has lived in Toronto for almost two decades, I cannot shake the Quebec out of me. Both professionally and socially, I notice that my human bonds grow fastest and strongest with other members of the Quebec diaspora. Those multiply nested countercultures seem to give us a unique outlook on life - a combination of self-awareness, clannishness, polyglotism, and cosmopolitan posturing that often leaves us chatting alone, amongst ourselves in the kitchen, at parties in Toronto and Vancouver. The jokes we tell and the questions we ask may be in English. But the backstory comes with French subtitles.

Terry DiMonte: Mister Montréal

Editor's note: this post is a translation of an interview with Terry DiMonte, conducted by Marc Cassivi, author of the book Mauvaise langue and columnist at La Presse. Click here to read the original French text.

Terry DiMonte has been hosting the morning show at CHOM-FM since 1984, with a four-year hiatus in Calgary and a few years in competing Montréal stations. The man is from Verdun, born to a father of Italian descent and an English-Canadian mother. He grew up in Pierrefonds, during the 60s. Conversation about the two solitudes...

Marc Cassivi: I often listened to you on CHOM in the morning when I was 12 and my father drove me to school. Today, I listen to you while driving my 12 and 9-year old sons. I hope it doesn't make you feel too old!

Terry DiMonte: On the contrary! It makes me very happy to hear that. I meet other parents who tell me the same thing.

Marc Cassivi: It's been over 30 years!

Terry DiMonte: I was 26, when I started. I was lucky. CHOM had difficulties, so they gave me the morning show. I was in Winnipeg at the time. The timing was perfect. There was no pressure, we had a lot of freedom.

Marc Cassivi: Since that time, you've become part of Montréal's social fabric...

Terry DiMonte: I'm an Anglo, but I feel as Québécois as any other guy who calls himself de souche. I'm very attached to Québec and Montréal. They're in my veins. I spent four years in Calgary - it was not my first choice - and I missed Québec a whole lot. I remember a visit, while living in Calgary, with my friend Sylvie Brunetta in Laval. She was listening to a song by Jean-Pierre Ferland [Un peu plus haut, un peu plus loin], sung by Céline Dion and Ginette Reno on the Plains of Abraham. When Ginette Reno sang, it was so powerful that I was moved almost to tears. Sylvie turned to me and said, "Hey, what's going on with you?" It touched me as much as it touched her, though I am a bloody square head! [Laughs] What distinguishes Québec... I don't know how to describe it, I don't always feel part of it, but I understand it. I was listening to Québec idols singing in Québec city a Québécois song written by a Québec monument, and it made me vibrate. I left Alberta and I realized...

Marc Cassivi: ... how much you missed Québec?

Terry DiMonte: How Québécois I am! Although it is sometimes complicated. I remember one summer in NDG, in the 80s: a guy called Tony had a restaurant named Cosmo's. I looked one day and this man in his sixties was up on a ladder, repainting his sign to hide the English words because he had problems with the "language police". It hurt me. I come from here too. I was born here. And I was told that my language did not fit here. But when Ginette Reno sings, I get all choked up. It's a strange feeling.

Marc Cassivi: But you do understand that, to survive, the French language must be protected?

Terry DiMonte: I am absolutely in favor of Bill 101. Some refuse to believe that English speakers understand the aspirations of Francophones, but most of us do. I've seen things evolve. I was a child in Verdun and everything was written in English. It wasn't fair nor equitable. It's difficult for many to understand, but from an Anglo's perspective, [the adoption of the Charter of the French Language] in 1977, was quite a shock. Today, with hindsight, I understand it very well. I often say: if you can't buy yourself a Métro ticket, order at the restaurant or ask for directions in French in Québec, you should take lessons or leave. Because French is the language of the majority.

Marc Cassivi: Bill 101 has allowed children of immigrants like Sugar Sammy to become bilingual or trilingual.

Terry DiMonte: And it has trained a generation of Sugar Sammy, perfectly at ease in French and English. I was born and I grew up here. And yet, I haven't had the chance to learn French [well enough] for us to do this interview in French! I speak French like a Anglo. My father spoke Italian at home and he married an Anglophone. His brothers married Francophones, the only French I learned was that of my aunts. I understand that French is what makes Québec so unique. But sometimes radicals - "angryphones" Anglos as much as ultranationalist Francophones - drive me to despair. Things have changed a lot, but there are still people on both sides who do not want to listen.

Marc Cassivi: The vast majority of us live peacefully...

Terry DiMonte: From time to time, in a shop, someone says, "Bonjour/Hi!". For me, this is not the end of the world. Even if I understand the feeling of insecurity. That said, I've never felt that my presence here was detrimental to French in any way whatsoever. My grandparents were born in Italy, my uncles and aunts didn't speak a word of English, my cousins ​​speak French... When I saw this restaurant owner repaint his sign to remove the English words, I felt bad because I feel Québécois. I do not feel like a threat to Québec.

Marc Cassivi: How has Québec evolved in the 32 years that you've been doing radio?

Terry DiMonte: I think things have improved. The majority of Anglophones who stayed - because several left in the 70s - remained because they feel at home here. We do not feel foreign in Québec. Many of my high school friends left because they were afraid. But the new generation of English speakers no longer see things the same way.

Marc Cassivi: They don't feel marginalized...

Terry DiMonte: Sometimes, I see a angry guy on television and I think he would be happy if all Anglos had left. It's not very pleasant, but it's really a small minority discourse that we hear less and less. I often tell my friends who live in the West: Québec is the most interesting place to live in this country and there are no people more generous than the Québécois.

Marc Cassivi: And yet, despite thirty years at the helm of a popular morning show in Montréal, you're still not very well known among Francophones. There's still a cultural divide...

Terry DiMonte: Of course. This is understandable. My Ontario or Alberta friends also ask me, "Who are these stars at the ADISQ gala?" I am a very big fan of Serge Fiori, who was one of my idols when I was a teenager and whom I interviewed recently for the first time. He invited me to his home. It's one of my fondest interview memories of my whole life. He told me how ironically, after the famous Saint-Jean concert on the mountain in 1976, after believing they would soon have their own country and stayed up all night, guys from Harmonium went at Beauty's for breakfast, the bastion of Montréal's Anglo-Jewish culture. That, for me, is Montréal!

What I would tell an immigrant

Editor's note: this post is a translation of an opinion piece written by Boucar Diouf, a stand-up comic, raconteur, biologist and TV host. Click here to read the original French text.

Before leaving Sénégal for Québec in 1991, I was told about culture shock, temperature, freedom, openness, humor and many other aspects of the identity and culture of its people. But nobody told me about this unique relationship that the majority of Québécois have with religion. Yet, it is of the utmost importance to inform people that immigrating to Québec is far from being the same as settling in the rest of Canada. Québec has a relationship with religion, and gender equality, that even the Western part of the country barely understands. For proof, just remember how the death of Dr. Henry Morgentaler befell people here while you could almost hear some of our neighbors to the West say "good riddance!".

The debate about the Charter led me to think that the exercise was indispensable. Religious extremism can in no way mesh with French-language Québec culture. In fact, had I to inform an immigration applicant on the subject, this is what I would say:

"Sir, before you leave, you should know that since the mass desertion of churches, caused by the Quiet Revolution, the majority of Québécois have a very peculiar relationship with religion. Québec may have the highest rate of agnostic citizens in North America. To the point that, today, it is mainly missionaries from the South, Latin America and Africa, that timidly try to rekindle the faith in some parts of la belle province."

"Once very pious, this nation has become the territory of the greatest blasphemers of the galaxy. Here, not content with having transformed churches into condos, we recycled liturgical accessories into as many swear words that punctuate the local language and make the delight of stand-up comics who have become champions all categories of religious desecration."

"You are about to come to the most open and peaceful nation in North America. You are about to meet women who are among the most assertive and egalitarian in the Western world; where the mere mention of religious rights causes a general urticaria crisis; where the right to abortion is non-negotiable; where men are entitled to paternity leave; where marriage is no longer a sacred institution and one of every two couples divorces when things go sour; where teenagers in their puberty are allowed to kiss and date; where gays and lesbians conspicuously display their orientation and have the right to marry; where sex change to find one's existential balance is also well accepted."

"It is all these qualities that make Québec, while not perfect, a land of freedom, openness and tolerance, for those who are willing to keep an open mind. If I tell you all this, it is because some of these very progressive social gains, which proudly cement our collective identity, are incompatible with a strict reading of religious dogmas. These social gains could very well lead many extremists to look at us as representatives of Satan on Earth."

"Then sir, with all this information, if you have no objection that one day your children may date, kiss, sleep with and marry one of ours, it is because you are agnostic or practice your religion with moderation. Québec is thus an obvious choice to make it a land of your own."

Yes, Fatima Houda-Pepin, you are right to believe that fundamentalists are the real enemies of secularism! I would add that they also are the enemies of the vast majority of believers, whom they harm by rebound.

A bird in the hand

I work in a completely bilingual environment. Anglos and Francos working together speaking whichever of the two languages feels the most comfortable or is best suited for the occasion. Truly a great working experience.

I was having a casual conversation on the current Québec elections with one of my Anglo colleagues this week. He was whining about the general state of political instability the province has been in for so long, putting forward that it was detrimental to the economy of both the country and the province; I agree. When I replied that he was right and added that the only party with a proposal to solve this instability is the Parti Québécois, he looked at me puzzled.

I explained that, although support for sovereignty has been under the 40% mark for a while, the vast majority of Québécois is against the constitutional status quo. Polls found that seven out of 10 believe the Québec government should try to initiate constitutional change in Canada. I stressed that proponents of the federalist option mostly look away, sweeping the issue under the rug, pretending that Canada is a united country. "This is the cause of the instability", I added. "Maintaining a fertile ground for the sovereignty movement." He was not sure what to think.

He then confessed he voted for the PLQ through early vote. "I understand that you would not vote for the PQ, but why not CAQ?" I asked. He replied he voted strategically for the option with the most chance of preventing a PQ victory... I recently rationalized his decision.

Faced with the decision between:

1. a party that will perhaps hold a referendum that will perhaps be victorious that will perhaps be detrimental to Anglos; and
2. a party that saw the provincial debt increase from G$125 to G$175 in the nine years it was in power and did everything it could to prevent the Charbonneau Commission.

... he chose the latter.

I gather this gives a whole new meaning to the old saying: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

Charter of Values and Québec criticism

Editor's note: this post was submitted by Jared Milne.

The debate over Québec's secular Charter of Values has been a heated one. The proposed Charter would restrict public servants from wearing conspicuous religious items such as burqas and niqabs, which many critics say infringes on the rights and freedoms of religious minorities in Québec. Quebecers who support the Charter, in turn, have been accused of bigotry, especially by other Canadians, claiming that this is just another example of the racism that is supposedly so prevalent in that province, and the supposed ethnic nationalism of the Parti Québécois.

As an Anglophone living in Alberta, I have to admit that some of these critics have left me scratching my head. I'm no fan of the Charter of Values, and I think that it would be a bad idea if implemented. What surprises and bothers me, however, is the fact that there's been so much criticism directed at Québec from critics on all parts of the spectrum, while criticism of similar attitudes in other parts of Canada and the world usually only comes from the political left, when it even appears at all.

Other parts of Canada haven't always been welcoming to religious minorities who wear conspicuous religious items. Back in the 1980s, a young Sikh man had to get the RCMP to make an exception to its uniform code so that he could wear a turban while serving as a police officer, against the hostility of many Canadians who said that he should wear the same traditional uniform as everybody else. In the 1990s in Peel Ontario, a Sikh student had to fight for his right to wear his kirpan, or ceremonial dagger, in an Ontario school. In 2008, a Sikh man in Calgary, Alberta, was barred from entering a courthouse because of his kirpan. The comments on the news article, which describe how Alberta has decided to allow Sikhs to wear their kirpans in courthouses, show how much many readers disagreed with the decision.

Prominent Canadian conservatives are expressing views similar to the ones behind the Charter of Values. In 2011, Ezra Levant fiercely criticized the Toronto police service for allowing female officers to wear hijabs and other symbols while working for the secular police force. In 2012, federal Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney spearheaded an initiative to bar women from wearing niqab facial veils at Canadian citizenship ceremonies.

A surprising number of Canadians in general either support the Charter of Values, or something similar to it. National Post writer Paul Russell was surprised by the number of readers who wrote in expressing support for the Charter, or even criticizing it for not banning facial coverings. A Global News poll revealed that while many Canadians outside Québec did not like the Charter of Values, they did support bans on burqa veils and kirpans.

Such attitudes exist in other English-speaking countries, too. In 2013, an Irish court ruled that Sikhs could not wear their turbans while working for the country's police force. In 2010, one of Great Britain's first Sikh judges criticized schools and other public places for barring entry to Sikh people wearing kirpans. Multiculturalism and immigration have been controversial in Britain in general. Araminta Wordsworth wrote that conservative politicians are scoring political points by attacking immigration, even as some Britons feel their 'Britishness' is being overwhelmed by immigrants who won't integrate. Other critics write that Britain's common values are being undermined by immigrants who refuse to integrate and stick to values that the critics say force women into secondary roles in society.

And just for the record, support for the Charter is not unanimous in Québec, even among the separatist movement. Prominent separatists such as Lucien and Gérard Bouchard, Jacques Parizeau and Bernard Landry have all called for the Charter's bans on religious garb to only be extended to people with coercive state powers, such as judges, police officers and prosecutors, which is exactly what commentators like Levant were calling for. Other separatists, such as Jean Dorion, head of an organization that calls for an inclusive Québec separatism, has spoken about how the Charter goes against Québec history [Google translation], and the need to welcome as many Quebecers as possible for independence to be viable.

Anybody who thinks that the attitudes behind the Charter of Values are restricted to Québec is kidding themselves. Certainly there are critics who will oppose the Québec Charter and also decry similar attitudes and actions in other parts of Canada and the world. My problem isn't with them, but with those critics who, for some strange reason, insist on singling out Québec and Quebecers as somehow being more racist than other Canadians for supporting the Charter.

Why are those Quebecers who support the Charter somehow more racist than people in other parts of Canada and the world, when similar attitudes exist not just in other Canadian provinces, but foreign countries like Great Britain and Ireland? Why is it somehow ethnic nationalism when francophone Quebecers want to impose some restrictions on religious garb, but not the likes of Ezra Levant and Jason Kenney when they decry police officers wearing veils and turbans, or ban the wearing of facial coverings in court proceedings or citizenship ceremonies?

Why is it alright for Anglophones to express concern when immigrants who refuse to integrate and adopt local values, while it's supposedly bigotry when Francophones do the exact same thing?

I honestly don't get it, I really don't.

Bill 101 and the English press

Did you hear about the pastagate? A Montréal restaurateur wants to give an exotic experience to his clientèle and uses Italian in his menu. A government representative working for the Office québécois de la langue française sees it as an offense against the state and issues a warning. The PQ government denounces the public servant's gesture, deeming it overzealous, and calls off the warning. End of story?... apparently not.

In Toronto, Canada's National Newspaper writes an editorial on the topic accusing the PQ government of fostering conditions leading to the event. The situation sheds such a ridiculous light on the province's language law, why not take advantage of it?

Apparently, the Canadian readership craves on such anecdotes, in which individuals demonstrate their lack of judgment. Here are a few others that English media deemed newsworthy:

• 1996: A woman warns the owner of a Quebec pet store she might get in touch with language authorities because Peekaboo, the parrot she wanted to buy, didn't speak French.
• 1999: The Old Navy chain is asked to rename its stores "La Vieille Rivière." It never happens.
• 2000: The owner of an Indian restaurant is told he's breaking the law by having coasters for "Double Diamond," a British beer.
• 2001: Some people express disappointment that race-car driver Jacques Villeneuve calls his restaurant "Newtown."
• 2005: Language authorities say they will investigate complaints that Montreal Mayor Gérald Tremblay's party used the word "Go" on its campaign posters and pamphlets, as in "Go Montreal."
• 2007: Imperial Oil says it will keep its Quebec-only "Marché Express" name for its Esso gas stations after protests against a proposal to change the name to "On the Run," as the stations are known elsewhere in North America.
• 2007: Language activists decry that callers to many Quebec government offices are told to "press nine" for English before instructions are delivered in French. Some of the departments have since changed the message to put English at the end.

Meanwhile in Ontario, French speaking parents under supervised visits are not allowed to speak to their children in their mother tongue... and no English media sees it fit to cover the story [Google translation].

Foods to eat in Québec

Québec is renown for its culinary specificity. In a recent edition, the National Geographic lists the top ten foods to eat in the province:

1. Poutine
2. Bagels in Montréal
3. Tire sur la Neige in Montérégie and Laurentians
4. Cheese in Eastern Townships
5. Shish Taouk in Montreal
6. Smoked Meat Sandwich in Montreal
7. Tourtière in Quebec City
8. Couscous in Montreal
9. Haitian Tassot in Montreal
10. Lamb in Charlevoix

It's cool to witness immigration's contribution to the mix. Bagels and Smoked Meat have been there for quite a while. The more recent additions are fairly easy to spot. Click here to read the whole story.

Québec nationalists reaching out

Sovereigntists never took good care of their image outside the French speaking world. Wait... there's one word too many... allow me to rephrase. Sovereigntists never took care of their image outside the French speaking world. I always thought they needed to build bridges (click here for more on the topic) and letting others do what they want with your publicity is definitely not a good way to do it.

Stating that explaining the rationale for separatism to an Anglo crowd is a though sell is a euphemism. Somehow, the current péquiste government seems to give it some credit and named Jean-François Lisée in charge of building bridges with the English-speaking community. Even if some didn't like it, the péquistes have taken several steps in that direction and seem determine to establish a dialog.

The government is introducing changes to Bill 101 today. And Diane De Courcy, the minister in charge of these changes, is taking a shot at explaining them to the English community."The Quebec identity is multi-faceted. It hinges on our singular situation in North America, a world view that stems from our experience as a minority and, at the same time, a feeling of our originality. It comprises the values in which we recognize ourselves and a culture that is simultaneously European and North American. Above all, Quebecers of all origins share a language that is now a rallying point for them.Barely 40 years ago, the vast majority of immigrants sent their children to English-language schools and integrated naturally into the English-speaking community. We have made considerable progress in the integration of immigrants into the French-speaking community and can be proud of it, although much remains to be done to foster their integration into the labour market and increase the proportion of newcomers who settle outside the Montreal area. Today, we can more confidently welcome those who want to build Quebec with us."I know some people won't like her words (click here for the whole letter), but at least, someone's talking.

The Ununited States of Canada

Stephen Harper once said that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada (read about it here). The "united" part of that statement always felt awkward to me... more like wishful thinking than reality. Apparently, I'm not the only one.

A week from today, Canal D [in French only] will present Les états-désunis du Canada [Google translation], a documentary that sheds a light on separatism outside Québec.  A trailer has been creating a buzz on the web for the past two weeks.  Click below to see it.



I heard before that "the Québécois are whiners", but isn't it ironic that the only ones whining in this clip are from Alberta?
"We keep hearing that you can get daycare for $7 a day.  We can't get daycare for $7 an hour!... here in Alberta.  You have cheaper, even free, university tuition.  Our students are paying up to $9,000 a semester I think.  In Québec, they have an advantageous proportion of medical personnel to  population that they care for, compared to us.  How do they do it?  Well... they take our money!"Of course, not all Albertans are alike. I wish those complaining would realize that if they were willing to pay the same amount of taxes we do as a society, they could very easily afford all the programs they envy us.

Chronicles of a Hasidim

As it turns out, I'm not the only one who feels his community is misunderstood by observers. I recently stumbled on this blog held by a group of young Hasidim from Outremont who felt an urge for an honest and sincere dialog with its neighbors.We hope this dialog will increase our respect of one another by dispelling some of the myths, misconceptions that we may have towards each other, and in turn to gain some understanding of our neighbors and how they view our distinct way of life.

We know that there will always be some ill-willed individuals who will make mockery out our attempt to bring about this open dialog, but nevertheless we feel this is our duty as human beings to try to do good and bring about peace in our world.Click here for more...

Immigration and attitudes

Canada prides itself in being a country of immigrants. In recent years, immigration has become an important part of the Canadian identity. This trait is particularly prevalent in provinces other than Québec.

The Globe and Mail is currently conducting an on-line survey to capture the attitude of Canadians toward immigration in the country. The National newspaper invites its readers to chart their perspective and compare their opinion to others. The survey basically asks two questions:

1. How do you feel immigration affects Canada?
2. How often do you interact with immigrants?

At the time of this blog entry, findings suggest that 81% of respondents frequently interact with immigrants and 78% believe that immigration helps Canada. The breakdown per province and territory is as follows:

• Alberta: 82% frequently interact and 79% believe immigration is a plus.
  
• British Columbia: 79% and 77%
• Manitoba: 74% and 80%
• New Brunswick: 72% and 80%
• Newfoundland and Labrador: 76% and 77%
• Northwest Territories: 95% and 100%
• Nova Scotia: 73% and 84%
• Nunavut: 88% and 63%
• Ontario: 83% and 76%
• Prince Edward Island: 72% and 67%
• Québec: 88% and 86%
  
• Saskatchewan: 83% and 77%
• Yukon: 84% and 84%

I can't help but notice Québec's enviable position in the survey and how it contrasts with what seems to be the opinion of other Canadians in regards to the Québécois' attitude towards immigrants.

English-speaking readers from Québec are the most bilingual in the country. French-speaking readers of the newspaper are obviously all bilingual. The Globe's readership from Québec is thus the most bilingual, compared to other parts of the country.

Given that bilingualism allows a greater variety of cultural productions than readers from other provinces, I submit that it is the main driver of this open-mindedness. What do you think?

Katimavik: 1977-2012?

I'm a Katimavik alumnus. Initially one of the many opportunities I took advantage of to improve my second language, it had a profound impact on my personal life; the young adult that I was in 1984 didn't know much about the world outside the family cocoon. It was also my first close encounter with Canadians who spoke only one of the two official languages... an eye-opening experience.

If you're familiar with the program, you're probably aware that in the 2012 federal budget, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that the program will be eliminated. The reason?... the comparatively high per-person cost of the program when compared to other government initiatives targeted at youth.

Here are some facts the organization has been sharing in response to the announcement:

• The yearly budget for Katimavik to have 1462 youth complete the program in 64 communities helping more than 500 community partners is $15,935,470. This amounts to a total cost per day of $77 per volunteer.
• The volunteer work performed by the volunteers is valued at $10,749,518.
• The direct investments by Katimavik groups in each of the 64 communities where the program takes place, is valued at $218,000 per community, for a total of $13,952,000.
• In 2010-2011, 90% of Katimavik community partners indicated that the Katimavik volunteers' involvement improved their capacity to accomplish their daily tasks.
• Last year, 91% of volunteers said that they would recommend the program to their friends and 88% said Katimavik was one of the best experiences of their lives.

It certainly was for me...

Playing the identity card

Some 100 years ago, French-speaking inhabitants of this country had very few models to look up to. Poor and undereducated, they followed the path drawn by the Church... raising as many children as possible with very little mean. Life was tough.

In 1909, John Ambrose O'Brien entertainded the idea of creating a hockey team to capture francophone interest as a rival for the Montréal Wanderers. This new team was to essentially recruit French-speaking hockey players only. The name chosen to underline this particular trait was Le Club de Hockey Canadien.

Perhaps, you're unsure why the name "Canadien" would specifically appeal to French-speakers. If this is the case, you're unfamiliar with the origins of the word. You see... in those days, English-speakers in this country still had strong ties with England. They basically were British North Americans. In contrast, French settlers and their descendants had long broken their ties with France, developing their own very specific identity, as les Canadiens.

John Ambrose O'Brien saw a commercially feasible venture in exploiting this feeling of distinctiveness. Time proved him right. The hockey team became one of the most successful professional sports team in the world, giving French Canadians from all over the country the models they never had. And what models!... six championship cups in the 50s, four in the 60s, six in the 70s... 24 in total.

Today, pretty much everyone in the country see themselves as Canadians and the majority probably wonders why Montréal's hockey team bears such a name. What used to be known as the Canadien identity has now morphed into something different, the Québécois identity. Le Club de Hockey Canadien hasn't followed this trend (nor should it), but a newer team with less heritage could very well do so.

Founded in 1993, L'impact is Montréal's soccer team. This year is its first season in the MLS. Upon its entry in the big league, the owner saw it fit to redo its entire image. Like Les Canadiens de Montréal did some 100 years ago with French Canadians, L'Impact chose the path of identity to appeal to the Québécois' strong feeling of distinctiveness. Click below to see for yourself.



Of course, today's Québécois don't need heroes as French Canadians of the past did. But if this video doesn't touch you, in all good faith, what will? Look at the picture below and tell me... what are these gentlemen saying to the Québécois of all origins?... be part of the team...

Let the awakening begin?

Times are good for sovereigntists... sorry for repeating myself. A new survey found that 44.5 percent of Québécois would still support separating from Canada if the Constitution could not be changed enough to satisfy the majority of the province. What's wrong?

Following Parizeau's infamous speech in 1995, the PQ has been relatively quiet on the identity front. Since their arrival at the helm, the Liberals have been taking care of their English-speaking electorate. How shall I put this?... la nature a horreur du vide... nature abhors a vacuum?... not sure... but the government's negligence in regards to the linguistic situation in Montréal for the last couple of decades is fertile ground for the sovereignty movement. How so?

In his recent contribution to L'actualité, about the situation of French in Montréal [Google translation], Jack Jedwab points out that the majority of Québécois feels that French as a language would be better protected in a sovereign Québec than in the current federation. The director of the Association for Canadian Studies also points out that these conclusions don't only apply to French-speaking Québécois; the majority of Anglophones and Allophones feel the same way.

With the persistent signals the media has been sending in regards to linguistics incidents in Montréal, there's no doubt in my mind that the Québécois are concerned. Add a Conservative government who's alienating the province of Ottawa in the mix and you have... two... shall I call these?... winning conditions?

Apparently, all this comes as a surprise to many Canadians. Take a look at some of the reactions the report in The Globe and Mail has been prompting to see for yourself. One commentator asks (referring to the Québécois): "Are these people NUTS?" I reply: "Perhaps... but you haven't been following all this very closely... right?"

Ici, on parle English

As it is often the case when it comes to language perspectives in Montréal, the conclusion of a survey conducted by L'actualité magazine is stirring the pot. You can read it here [Google translation], but it's pretty much the usual stuff for those who mix with both English and French cultures on a regular basis. A lot of huff and puff... one side discovering the limited knowledge of the other for what they take for granted... etc.

One important thing that I'm pleased to put a number on is the proportion of Anglophones who consider themselves Québécois. Findings of the survey suggest that 80 percent of Anglophones identify themselves as such. A number that contrasts with results from other provinces where about two thirds of the residents see themselves as Ontarians, Albertans or others. A number that would have been even more surprising a few decades ago, but is somewhat consistent with testimonials and reactions The Gazette has been publishing once in a while.

One thing that I particularly liked about this survey is the contribution of Josh Freed. The man is, among other things, a well-known columnist, the creator of the word "neverendum", the co-author of The Anglo guide to survival in Québec and, above all, a true dyed-in-the-wool Montrealer... un vrai de vrai Montréalais pure laine... un Anglo-Québécois who loves his province with all its buoyancy and contradictions... I trust you get the picture.

In his recent column, Mr. Freed reflects on the limitations of the cover story published by L'actualité:
We Québec Anglos chose to stay here when hundreds of thousands of others left. We stayed through exhausting sign-law battles and two neverendums we didn't want.

We stayed because we're Québécois - and Montrealers, who love this city with a passion few Canadians have for theirs. We like the French language, French bistros, French wine, French food, French kissing and French's mustard.

We've stayed in Montréal while many Francophones have quit for the suburbs. And as I wrote in L'actualité: We may need a Bill 301 to save French in Montréal by forbidding more Francophones from moving off the island.Click here to read his full reaction.

Québec voters

Yesterday, Lysiane Gagnon reported in The Globe and Mail that, according to a recent survey by Léger Marketing, the Bloc has the most support in Québec, at 31 percent, four points ahead of the NDP. The Liberals are lagging behind at 22 percent. And the Conservatives are at the bottom with a miserable 14 percent.

Since voters in my province are now back in the old fold of the Bloc Québécois, less than a year after giving 59 seats to the NDP, the columnist points out that "it is an understatement to say Québec voters are volatile".

Volatile?... let's check this out...

• In 1993, 49% of the voters in Québec gave 56 seats the Bloc.
• In 1997, 38% gave 44 seats.
• In 2000, 40% gave 38 seats.
• In 2004, 49% gave 54 seats.
• In 2006, 42% gave 51 seats.
• In 2008, 38% gave 49 seats.
• In 2011, 23% gave 4 seats.

Hmmm... apart from the fling voters had with Jack last summer, results seem to revolve around the 44% mark (±6%). I don't see much volatility. Am I looking at this the right way? Or perhaps, Mrs Gagnon is referring to the fact that current support has yet to reach normal levels again... nah... that's not it.

Mrs Gagnon is denouncing the Québécois' short honeymoon with the federalist party as if it were some sort of surprise. How could that be? Another survey [in French] by Léger Marketing, found that 3 out of 4 Québécois are against the constitutional status quo. And guess what?... the only alternative on the table is the sovereigntists' proposal.

This looks like the slow, but steady, return to the previous equilibrium.

Halal meat and the federalists

The PQ feels that halal meat should be labeled for consumers to make an informed decision. Sounds reasonable... no issue here... next! The PQ claims the traditional religious ritual used to kill the animals hurts Québec values because it is inhumane... oops!

When I read about it [Google translation] in La presse, I thought: "wow!... this is great material for the federalist press". I was right. It didn't take very long for The Globe and Mail to write an editorial about it... headlining that "Québec's controversy over halal meat is another manifestation of politics of exclusion"... yep!... "another manifestation of politics of exclusion".

According to the editorial, if critics of the practice could show that animals are made to suffer more than those slaughtered by the usual methods, then the objections would have merit. To me, an exhaustive coverage of the controversy, even for an opinion piece, would also have merit.

Three things come to mind. First, the editorial barely touches the PQ's main point, i.e. that halal meat should be properly labeled for consumers to make an informed decision. Second, the editorial makes no mention of Charest supporting appropriate labeling of foods produced under religious rites. Third, it neglects to mention that the CAQ also shares the PQ's point of view. That's it... three simple items that could have been part of the editorial.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the PQ's use of Québec's values to appeal to some while ostracizing others. I may not be convinced that religious rites in food distribution (click here for some real examples) are still as justified today as they were when devised, but I respect them. In contrast to the editorial's conclusion, and like the majority of Québécois, I easily find common ground with recently arrived immigrants, and don't particularly feel tempted by the politics of exclusion.

My point has more to do with the Globe's intent. As it is too often the case, this was too good an opportunity to not hit the nail of intolerance and demonize the sovereigntists again (click here for more)... especially in the favorable light the PQ has been recently looked at.

Still... it strikes me how quick federalists are to jump on such incidents. It's as if intolerance and exclusion were the only handles they had to counter the appeal for a sovereign Québec. I wish federalists spent half the efforts boasting the merit of our great country. Is this too much to ask?

Will Québec save Canada?

A recent article [Google translation] published in La Presse states that the Harper Government acknowledges the strategy the PQ has been using for the upcoming provincial election. In essence, Pauline Marois has been putting forward that the Conservatives' right-wing agenda is proof that their is no room in Canada for the distinct province (let it be noted that 60% of Canadians voted against Harper at the last federal election). How this recognition by the Conservatives will influence their actions remains to be seen. Still, the influence of Québec politics on Ottawa may not be dismissed altogether, despite the collapse of the Bloc.

Yesterday, the Conservatives managed to push their controversial omnibus crime bill through Parliament. The bill puts an onus on any province that favors rehabilitation over imprisonment of young offenders. Today, The Globe and Mail reports that "Québec refuses to implement Harper's crime bill".

What's next? With their interim leaders, both the Liberals and the NDP lack the full thrust of a solid opposition in Ottawa. Is Québec the only stakeholder bold enough to stand against the Harperites?

Canadians and Canadian movies

Last week was an important one for the Canadian movie industry. The 32nd Annual Genie Awards, honoring Canada's greatest, was held Thursday. As expected by many, Québécois movies did rather well.

Among the many recipients, one particularly caught my attention, Starbuck. It's the story of a perpetual adolescent who discovers that, as a sperm donor, he fathered 533 children. It won the Golden Reel Award, presented annually to the Canadian film that has earned the highest domestic box office. It won the same award last night at La soirée des Jutras [in French], the ceremony honoring Québec's greatest.

In the province, Starbuck raked in $3.4M. In the whole country, its box office performance totals a little more than $3.5M. You read this right... the Canadian film that earned the highest domestic box office sold for a little over $100,000 outside Québec! In other words, with a market more than three times the size of my province, the English language industry was not able to produce a movie as commercially successful as Québec did for itself.

What's wrong?... this is certainly not about lack of talent. Why aren't Canadians watching domestic movies? A recent survey [Google translation] found that 83% of the Québécois are favorably biased to Québec films. How do Canadians in other provinces feel about their own production? I mean... Uncle Sam produces some great flicks, but he's not the only one!

With theaters basically the property of American majors, can Canadians really watch movies produced outside the USA? Movies play an important part in a society's cultural fabric... how does this situation contribute to the Canadian psyche in terms of identity?

Some people probably think I don't get it... I wish they would explain.

Times are good for Sovereigntists - Part 2

Léger Marketing published the results of yet another survey concluding that the PQ is in majority territory [in French]. Overall, the CAQ is at 24%, the PLQ at 28% and the PQ at 33%. This lead may not seem important, but one has to keep in mind that support for the PQ among Francophones is at 40% and they basically determine the results in 100 of the province's 125 ridings.

It's still a bit early to qualify the trend as strong, but it adds an interesting variable to the possibility of an election prior to the public hearings of Quebec's commission of inquiry into construction corruption, a.k.a. the Commission Charbonneau.