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?