Borges Blogue

The «historical» position of France towards Québec

2010-10-12T08:38:00.000-04:00

Cet engagement tient en quelques mots: les socialistes y promettent de «rétablir la position historique de la France par rapport au Québec». (Cyberpresse 11 Oct. 2010)

The Socialist Party of France, and the larger French political establishment, have always maintained an extraordinary commitment to Québec, except for the intervening years between the end of the Seven Years War (1763) , when Britain gained Québec as a colony from France, and the emergence of the Québécois separatist movement, culminating in de Gaulle’s famous declaration from the balcony of the Montréal City Hall in 1967 (youtube). For 200 years , France largely ignored their «francophone brothers», then when a strong national identity, coupled with a secessionist movement emerged, suddenly the French Republic became some kind of stake-holder in the future of Québec.

Forgive me for being cynical, but it seems that the French government only starts pretending to care about the future of Québec and its people when it is politically advantageous. Portraying itself as the protector and cheerleader of Québec is sometimes useful to the Establishment, it gives them credit with their own electorate because it shows that are were defending a small, oppressed, largely White Catholic francophone people (needless to say that the cause of other oppressed nations, specifically those in Françafrique, had not been so feverously advanced in the previous years). That noble position is, however, sometimes trumped by the larger diplomatic and economic relations between Paris and Ottawa.

While France for many years has maintained a keen interest in Québec, the question of sovereignty has been a bone of contention even in mainstream French politics. For example Sarkozy came out as a more neutral player in the long running transatlantic drama, saying that fraternity between Québec and France should not exclude Canada, now the Parti Socialiste draws the line in the sand (much to the joy of the Parti Québécois).

Of course, the diplomatic relationship between Québec and France has deepened and been formalized into more than just a few proclamations and slogans. Now there are several agreements in force, such as the ability for Québécois employers to advertise jobs directly to the Pôle Emploi (France’s answer to the Job Bank), a mutual recognition of diplomas, etc. That being said, while the relationship is more beneficial and more concrete, it is still a matter of political posturing to the electorate in terms of France’s «commitment» to Québec. One doesn’t expect anything more, most diplomacy is done with the a political agenda in mind, but let’s not rewrite history.

Some of the metropolitan French still look to the Québécois as their poorer, more rustic transatlantic cousin, hopelessly feeling around in the dark for a way out of the Canadian Confederation. They see Québécois French as inferior, and riddled with anglicismes (never mind that Québécois French has words for concepts and ideas that have been replaced whole-sale with anglicisms in Metropolitan French: le week end (FR) v. fin de semaine (QC), le shopping/faire de shopping (FR) v. magasinage/magasiner (QC) , chat (FR) v clavarder (QC) ). Snobbery aside, I think that the French public feels a certain affinity with Québec, not only because of historical and linguistic ties, but also in that they are both grappling with questions of national identity, language preservation, the boundaries of laicité, and the social and economic integration of minorities and immigrants, though they experience and respond to these questions in markedly different ways. Perhaps these nations can learn something from one another, perhaps it doesn't really matter (I wonder how much France's diplomatic support for Québec in whatever form will change anyone's mind in Québec or France about who or what to vote for)...

The péquistes

20 Years of the Bloc Québecois and the Secret to Political Success

2010-07-25T14:46:00.001-04:00

The Bloc Québécois will tomorrow celebrate 20 years of existence, having confounded the federal parties and the political establishment since its founding. Born out of the the fervour over the failure of the Lake Meech accord, the parties progressive-nationalist policies have attracted Québécois voters in large numbers, having never polled less than a third of the Québec electorate since it was created in 1990.

The party has a wide appeal, from rural conservatives to urban progressives, and every demographic in between (except of course for the Anglophone population). The progressive tone of the party's social and economic policies blends seamlessly with nationalist rhetoric, with neither strand overpowering the other. This is important in a country like Québec, where its people are keenly aware of the differences between themselves in the ROC, a country which prides itself on a separate identity.

Every policy espoused by the Bloc is, in the end, evidence in the case of Québec v. Ottawa. Nearly all their proposals have their foundation in the over-riding paradigm that Québec is ignored by the federal government. From transfer payments, to political representation in the House, to immigration policy, to government financing of culture, the message is simple: «We are different, and we deserve a say in our affairs». That is perhaps the secret to the Bloc's success, that they purport themselves to be the voice of a muted people.

Liberals: «A credible option for Québec»

2010-02-26T10:18:00.000-05:00

The Liberals have gone on the offensive against the Bloc Québécois after a fire-storm has erupted in Québec over independence, sparked off by its founder's comments on the impossibility of sovereignty for Québec in the short to medium term. The Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has called on the Québécois to take part in the governance of the federation, to make their influence felt in the country, by voting Liberal. These comments have been echoed by the Liberal chief for Québec, Jean-Marc Fournier.

According to the Liberals, the Québécois share their views over various issues such as government intervention in the economy, the environment, and foreign affairs, as well as regional development and an increased role for Québec in the way that the government functions and interacts with the provinces.

Now that the Bloc has been denounced by one of the people so instrumental to its founding, Lucien Bouchard, the Liberals have been quick to paint themselves as the alternative. In many ways they are correct, the Québécois nation shares many more common goals and objectives with the PLC than it does with the Tories. The Tories represent small, hands-off government, a lack of commitment to the environment and remedying climate change, two things which the Québécois do not identify with.

In the end, it is up to the people of Québec to decide for themselves who they vote for. The Bloc is in many ways more progressive and still more appealing to the Québécois than the Liberals themselves. They are further to the left various issues, and have the added advantage of utilising Québécois national sentiment and distinctness to whip up support, even if independence is not on the order of the day. We will see how this plays out at the general election, but it remains unlikely that the PLC will become bigger than the Bloc in Québec, no matter what happens over the issue of the plausibility of sovereignty.

Québécois put independence on the back burner

2010-02-24T14:03:00.000-05:00

Nearly two thirds of Québécois agree that independence should not be on the order of the day, and is not a pressing concern when compared to economic recovery and other important issues. These sentiments echo former PQ Prime Minister Lucien Bouchard's pronouncements on the subject last week, where in a recent speech, he stated that Québec's priorities do not lie with sovereignty, but rather the state of the economy, social services, education, etc.

The Parti Québécois has hit back saying that sovereignty is essential to the improvement of the Québécois society and economy, and that independence would mean a stronger recovery and more control over matters concerning society, culture, and language. While they try and make a strong case for this, the facts just do not stand up. As it stands, Québec benefits greatly from integration within the Canadian federation, and though many see it necessary that Québec be given a greater say over the country's finances, laws, and social cohesion, the prevailing view is that independence is no longer seen as the dream solution it once was.

The Québécois can plainly see that the PQ offers nothing with its sovereignty platform. Their strength in terms of electoral support lies in their proposals for education, the economy, and social cohesion, all of which have a nationalist tinge, but which could easily be implemented within Québec's current political structure. The proposals are without a doubt flawed, but they are what the electorate wants and needs to be dealt with, rather than rambling on about sovereignty and perpetuating the Messianic cult of independence.

Canada's aging population presents problems for future governments

2010-02-19T11:29:00.000-05:00

Top economist throughout the Industrialised world have long given grave predictions regarding the future of counties' pension systems as the population ages and the birth-rate drops. Canada has now joined the ranks of those with severely negative predictions, with economists and demographers predicting that our healthy ratio of working people to those in retirement of 5:1, will drop to 2.5:1 over the next 25 years, raising questions as to how the system of pensions and social security for the elderly will be maintained.

These questions arise as the Tory and Liberal policy to eliminate the new 56 billion dollar deficit is maintained to be one of finding efficiency savings and crossed fingers, with commitments on both sides to neither raise taxes nor cut equalisation payments. This would be a popular strategy with the Canadian people, but not very realistic.

As the population ages, and pressure on social services rises, the government will have to take some action if it is to alleviate an even more severe budget deficit and not let the quality and availability of services to decrease. The obvious, and best option, is not to freeze taxes, but to claw back revenue lost from the past decade of generous tax cuts to businesses and the wealthiest in this country. Canada is an attractive market, and moderate tax rises will neither drive businesses away, nor will it mean a great loss in profits for the businesses and companies operating in the federation. It's about paying a fair share to guarantee that every Canadian has access to the quality social services that they deserve.

Grits and Tories at parity in the polls

2010-02-18T10:31:00.000-05:00

The Tories and Liberals are on parity according to the latest Harris-Decima poll, conducted last week, with Tories polling 32%, and Liberals 30%. If continued, this trend will almost certainly mean another minority government after the election, with the NDP and Bloc Québécois again holding the balance of power.

Of course if the Liberals were to form the next minority government, one would think that they would be in quite a less stable position than the current Conservative government, as Tories are known to being less compromising, especially compared to the support that they have received from the Liberals up to this point on important issues in the Parliament.

The question remains, what exactly is increasing the popularity of the Liberals, and what is decimating the Conservative lead in the polls. Obviously prorogation is an issue, as is the issue of social and economic policy. One would surmise that it is more the former than the latter. Though the Liberals have unveiled many new policy options and priorities recently, it would be safe to say that it is more the popular discontent with the Tory government, and specifically its second prorogation of Parliament (for the second time in a year) that have resulted in this poll result.

One should also note that in Québec, the three federalists parties are being decimated by the Bloc Québécois, which has polled 41% of the respondents, compared with around 25 percent for the Liberals and 15 for the Conservatives.

Differences of political culture: Why Ignatieff oppossed the coalition

2010-02-17T12:59:00.000-05:00

In a new book by NDP campaign manager Brian Topp, titled «How we almost gave the Tories the boot» reveals in detail how the Liberals deliberately scuppered the chance to form an Opposition coalition with the aim of the Ignatieff grouping taking over the Liberal Party and calling elections later on in 2009.

It must be noted that the majority of Canadians were opposed to this coalition, and didn't want yet another election, but it still raises the question as to why the Grits supported the federal budget in January 2009, stopping the idea of a coalition dead in its tracks. It clearly wasn't a response to the will of the people, but rather a quite cynical attempt, both on the part of Stéphane Dion, and future Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, to make a grab at power with fresh elections.

The question must be asked: Just how opposed to a disastrous Tory government are the Liberals, and will they ever be willing to sacrifice potential political gains for the principle of forming a progressive government? What is more important to the Grits: to increase their power base, or to lead a progressive Canadian government?

For a pluralist Québec

2010-02-16T10:46:00.000-05:00

A new civic group has been formed by academics and individuals across Québec for the promotion of a rational application of shared values and reasonable accommodation and the further development of a dynamic, vibrant and tolerant country. The group calls itself «Pour un Québec Pluraliste». They have published a manifesto outlining their views and rationale behind them, and one must say it is spot on.

In such a diverse society as that of Québec, with its history of a distinct and separate identity, all the while accommodating mass migration, the issue of how to grapple with the challenges posed by the great changes in Québec since the 1960s requires a rational and balanced approach. It cannot be inflamed with nationalistic sentimentality and hysteria, two things that keep cropping up in the debate. The way in which the people and the government of Québec deal with these issues must not be heated and furious, but rather calm and with an aim towards building of a workable consensus.

The manifesto goes a long way towards bringing the debate from the clutches of fear-mongers and closeted xenophobes, and into the hands of the larger Québécois society. It's well worth a read, but if one can't read French, here are a few essential paragraphs which outline the main ideas contained in the document.

An overview:

''We believe that everyone can integrate into Québécois society-that is to say participating in the social, political and economic life of the country-maintaining an attachment to beliefs and practices which are different than those of the majority, as long as they do not pose a threat to the rights of others"

" Quite the contrary, the type of pluralism that we defend desires to be a strengthening of democratic values that respond to those of contemporary Québec."

On Secularism (Laicité)

"In Québec, the state elaborates on collective norms without any one religion dominating the State power and the public institutions. It excercises their neutrality, abstaining from favouring or interfering, directly or indirectly, a religion or secular conception of existence, within the limits of the common good. This political orientation responds to the need to protect the liberty of conscience and its free expression, and equally the equality of all citizens. This signifies that the civic and political rights of the citizens are not conditional to the abdication of beliefs and practices of those that express them. In Québec, since 1774, no believer is expected to throw aside a part of his faith in order to obtain access to public services. The Catholics, one must remember, were the first to benefit from this constitutional protection.

"...we believe that the banning pure and simple of all showings of religious affiliation would not respond to any social necessity. In the first place, any religious group in Québec, is in a place to impose their norms on the rest of society, so, the signs of religious belief is not in contradiction to the rights of the citizen. Such a ban would have a discriminatory effect..."

"The fact that a member in service of the State shows a sign of religious belief does not at all impair it to apply secular norms of an impartial fashion; the citizen doesn't note this in the same way it doesn't note the ethnic origin of the civil servant. No more than the colour of skin, the accent or the gender, one cannot presume that this religious affiliation constitute a bias that interferes in the manner that the civil servant applies the law or rule"

"Secularism isn't a means to resolves tensions (real or imaginary) by abolishing them"

In Conclusion:

"A popular strategy among the critics of the position that we have defended here is to claim that the pluralist perspective would be a battle axe taken to the historical trajectory of Québec. The facts indicate to the contrary that it is these tenants of a strict secularism and conservatives nationalism of identity that chose the path of division. The path of the reasonable recognition of diversity appears to us in continuity with the history of Québec. The Québécois Chart of Rights and Liberties, interculturalism, the Charte de la langue française, the «open secularism» are all forms of government which aim to establish an equilibrium, surely always moving, between the legitimate respect of the majority and cultural, linguistic and religious minorities. We believe that the constant search for this equilibrium honours the Québécois nation, that it is a preliminary to the search for an authentic way of living together. We desire that this keeps going"

Layton in first place among progressive Canadians

2010-02-15T10:48:00.003-05:00

The Canadian people have spoken on the question of who would be their first choice for Prime Minister of the country, and it is not good news for Michael Ignatieff and the Liberals. Of the three main parties, they come in last in the pronouncement of will of the Canadian population, with the New Democratic Party's leader Jack Layton coming in second place with 52 percent, trailing serving Prime Minister Stephen Harper at 85 percent. Michael Ignatieff comes in last with 40 percent.

This must be disheartening news for all Liberals. Despite a winter of policy and round-table political initiatives aimed at solidifying their progressive base and winning hearts and minds of those undecided, their Leader seems to be their Achilles heal. He doesn't seemed to be well-liked by the Canadian people, although he is doing much better than his predecessor Stéphane Dion.

The question remains what is he and is party doing wrong, and what is the NDP and Jack Layton doing right to attract such support as a leader of the country, despite his party and his policies coming in third in voting polls? Perhaps it is a firm commitment to Social Democracy and progressive values, while the Liberals are still seen, fairly enough, as bulwarks of the current capitalist centred economy and social policy. As the major party with the Conservatives they are perhaps seen as too much an integral part of the establishment?

Whatever is the case, the Liberals must make a more bold and consolidated effort in convincing Canadians that they have changed, and that they represent what Canadians want...

Lifelong learning for all!

2010-02-12T11:30:00.000-05:00

With proposed strike action by Ontario university faculty, and the recent news that tuition fees will be raised in Québec, Canada as a whole must take a hard look at how it values, and finances, higher education. In light of the economic downturn, universities will become more and more important, not only in absorbing the economically inactive, but also in giving Canadians news skills and degrees to help them contribute to the economy in the future.

We must look at the great benefits that universities bring to the economy, and not bulk at the costs that they bring. The federal government's commitment to higher education is not well outlined, and the provincial governments, who control over the financing and administration of higher education, need to make a strong commitment to colleges and universities to make sure that anyone that wants to can take advantage of the educational opportunities available to them.

Tuition fees in Canada are still some of the lowest in the world, certainly much less than the United States, and even in Britain, where they were only introduced in 1999 and stand at around $5329. While the fees in Canada are comparatively low, tuition fees should be abolished if the provincial governments are truly committed to the provision of accessible and affordable higher education for all.

It might seem like an untenable idea, especially in light of provincial government deficits, but it at the same time seems more necessary than ever. People, especially the young and the unemployed, need to have access to higher education, and many are put off by the high cost of education. If we are committed to providing free education through to the secondary level, why can we not make the leap to free lifelong education for all?

Political Developments in Venezuela

2010-02-10T15:14:00.001-05:00

The situation in Venezuela would seem to be developing quite rapidly at the moment. In the face of spiralling inflation, electricity shortages, resignations in the cabinet etc, the cracks are beginning to show more openly in the PSUV, one example is on Facebook: the PSUV has changed its endorsement of a page from the regular PSUV fan page to a new one, PSUV Militante, claiming that the former has been «taken by the Right».

The lines between the masses and the bureaucracy, both in the party and the wider movement, can be seen in the contradictions of government policy, such as launching of a People's Power initiative, by the government, while on the other hand it daily attempts to consolidate its hold on the Bolivarian movement (the above initiative is possibly an example of this). On blogs and message boards there is harsh criticism of Chavez, and also a lively debate on the future of the movement, especially regarding the participation of the masses and the relationship between the government and the people.

Another key development is the affirmation of support for the formation of workers militias by the government. The scheme will create militias, supposedly, in every district of Venezuela, and one expects that they will be a tool of the government for its support and defence rather than a militia under the people's control for the defence of their sovereign movement. It would seem that under pressure from below and above, the government is vacillating between consolidating control and widening the movement.

One doesn't know really what to make of on the events transpiring in Venezuela, or who will win, but it seems clear that battle lines are being drawn. Whether or not this will result in the strengthening of the bureaucracy and the government, or the revival of the revolutionary movement, is anyone's guess.

The PQ goes on the offensive over values and identity...and Islamophobia

2010-02-10T11:07:00.000-05:00

The Parti Québécois has re-opened the debate on the basic values and identity of Québec with their new Bill Aiming to Affirm the Fundamental Values of the Québécois Nation. The bill aims to modify the current Québécois «Charte des droits et libertés de la personne» with the addition of several clauses aimed at stemming the tide of «reasonable accommodation» and what they see as the destruction of the basis of Québécois society. The clauses concern: gender equality, the secular state, and the primacy of the French language.

While no Québécois would argue these principals, it is the way in which the party wishes to implement them which causes concern. The PQ wants to ban all public service employees from the wearing of any overt religious symbols, mainly the hijab. They have even put forward demands for the banning of the niqaab and burkha from the streets of Québec. These proposals stink of Islamophobia and xenophobia.

The party wants to show itself as the defender of Québec and it's distinct cultural and national identity, while at the same time trying to infringe on the cultural rights of people who are not, to use an awful phrase, «Québécois de souche». This is a mistake. Most Québécois take pride in their tolerance and welcoming attitude. They do not, for the most part, wish to see their national pride and cultural independence as an opportunity for some to start curtailing the rights of others in an attempt to protect these qualities.

It would seem that the PQ is trying to pick up the Rightist-slack left by the destruction of the ADQ and its electorate. That is not what it should be doing. The PQ has always tried to seem progressive and bold in its actions and policies, however while these proposals are bold, they are certainly not progressive: they are nationalistic in the worse sense of the word, and send the message that they are not prepared to stand up against anti-newcomer and anti-Islamic sentiments in the country.

If the PQ wants to defend the rights of the people of Québec, and reaffirm their values, then so be it, but it should be with the aim of creating a tolerant and welcoming society, something which most Québécois value fundamentally. The banning of religious symbols and dress would be a major step back in that aim.

Canadian cities top World's Most Liveable List

2010-02-09T15:57:00.000-05:00

The Economic Intelligence Unit, an Economist run think tank, has released it's report on the world's most liveable cities, and Canada has come up with top ranks. Its cities have made the achievement of making up a fifth of the Top 20, with Vancouver actually ranking in the top spot in a list judged on the criteria of environment, culture, infrastructure, etc.

Canada should be very proud of its achievements in urban planning and social services. These are essential to its continued development and should be made a top priority. Although even cities like Vancouver have terrible problems with poverty and a drugs epidemic, for the middle-classes and well-off they are fantastic. The issue is not how to make life better for those already living a charmed life, but how to lift Canada's urban poor out of despair and destitution. Though these cities have been awarded such top marks in comparison to other metropolitan areas in the world, they should not rest on their laurels and bask in their achievements: they should constantly move towards further development of infrastructure and provision of social services, stamping out urban blight and poverty, and generally making life bearable for all residents.

Canada's top cities in the world are:
Vancouver- #1 position
Toronto- #4
Calgary- #5 (Shared with Perth, Australia)
Montréal- #17 (Shared with Paris)

Senate Reform: Elect of Abolish?

2010-02-09T11:59:00.000-05:00

A recent opinion poll reveals a sharp divide between the ROC and Québec over their views for the future of the Senate. Most of the Rest of Canada wants to see the Senate elected, with figures at around 60 percent, and higher in the Western Provinces, while the people of Québec seem to mostly want to see it done away with completely, with 46 percent favouring this option.

Besides the gap of opinion between what is the best option, there is also a difference of views over how any of these options would be implemented. Most Québécois are arguing that any change to the Senate would need some sort of Constitutional amendment, requiring the support of at least 7 of the provinces, while many others outside Québec see it as a matter of legislation.

One thing is clear, both the ROC and Québec want a radical reform to the way the country is governed, they want a clear-cut break with the appointed Senate and the lack of control they have over the Upper House. The Senate as it stands is a vestige of feudalism and colonialism, and is anti-democratic, that has to change!

Liberal-NDP coalition back in sight

2010-02-05T12:47:00.000-05:00

Last year, when the Canadian public reacted with outrage at the proposed Liberal-NDP coalition, many thought such an idea would be dead in the water for years to come. Yet the idea seems to be back on the table, based on a new EKOS poll showing that no party will have a majority in Parliament. The latest survey shows that the Liberals would win only 122 seats, leaving them 32 MPs short of forming a government, which the NDP could help to make up with their projected 31 Parliamentarians.

What would be the Canadian opinion of such a coalition? Well after two prorogations of Parliament, a tepid economic recovery, and numerous scandals such as the Afghan torture affair, the Conservatives could do little more to become less popular. However that doesn't mean the public would accept a coalition without a fight. Before it was the issue of Stephen Dion's potential premiership, now that he has been neutralised, could the coalition be viable?

Prorogation leads to Tory fall in polls

2010-02-02T10:46:00.000-05:00

The long-held Tory lead among the Canadian public has dropped considerably and now the Conservative and Liberal Parties of Canada are at a parity in the polls, at 32 percent each, according to a Harris-Decima poll conducted recently. While at the same level of popularity, it is the Liberal Party which has made significant inroads with the Canadian people, slashing Tory leads especially in Ontario and Québec.

The lead is especially strong in the Toronto area ridings, where previously the Conservatives had made significant headway among ethnic minorities and women, but where they have now fallen behind the Liberals by five points (Lib: 40, Con: 35, NDP: 11). A similar situation in occurring in Québec, where although the Liberals are 10 points down on the Bloc Québécois, they have nearly double the support of the Tory party (BQ: 38, Lib: 28, Con: 13).

Much of this shift has been put down to the prorogation of Parliament, an act widely protested by Canadians, seen taking away popular political power and an attempt to insulate the Conservative majority from further embarrassment and lack of popularity. While the Tory party struggles to cope with the political situation, the Liberal Party has struck out with progressive policies to attract the Canadian voting public, such as increased early childhood learning funding, a roundtable discussion on poverty and homelessness, and the flagship «Canada at 150» discussions about the nation's identity and future.

Liberals make a play for the future of Canada

2010-01-07T14:51:00.000-05:00

The Liberal Party has opened a progressive debate concerning the future of Canada's identity as a nation, where it's headed, and what it wants. The conversation will culminate on 26-28 March in Montréal, with nearly a dozen town hall meetings leading up to it, being held all over the breadth and width of the Canadian nation.

This is a poignant move by the party, who has yet to position itself in the political debate. The Party is making a play for the progressive, forward thinking voters that make up in large part this country. In framing the debate towards the future, the Liberals can put aside present political squabbling and issues and really discuss what kind of a nation Canada wants to be.

The 150 website should be up soon, so stay tuned to the party website, and take part in the debate, whatever shade of political inclination you happen to have. This is a good chance to put issues on the agenda, and ask the existential questions that are required of a country from time to time.

A general election looms

2010-01-03T11:42:00.000-05:00

Political insiders in the House of Commons in Ottawa have hinted strongly at a Spring or Autumn election, as the Conservatives try to capitalise on the economic recovery that the nation is experienced (managing 0.1% growth in the third quarter of 2009). The Conservatives are hoping to finally come out the doldrums of minority government and achieve a long-term goal, that of a definite majority in the lower house.

The question remains, do the Canadian people want an election any time soon? Are they ready, do they see a need, or is the current political situation amenable to the population? Have the Conservatives proved their worth to the country, have they assured the general public that they won't launch a right-wing program of government once given the chance, something that Canadians, for the most part, simply do not want.

And what of the Liberals, what chances do they have? The NDP has proven its worth in its strong position on corporate taxes and its hard stance on workers' pensions. The Liberal Party has yet to define itself, yet to make known what exactly it stands for these days, other than vehemently opposing the Conservatives and using any chance to cry foul-play, though very recently they have decided to open a conversation on the future of Canada on its 150th birthday in 2017. Perhaps that is the reasoning behind Leader Ignatieff's promise of no elections in 2010...

Canadian Liberals: Differentiate, or Die

2010-01-02T10:52:00.000-05:00

The latest polls do not bode well for Michael Ignatieff and his party, although they do paint a rosy picture for the Prime Minister and even NDP leader Jack Layton has seen a boost in his standing among the Canadian public.

Despite dodging questions on Afghan detainees, climate change, and threatening to prorogue Parliament until after the Winter Olympic games (and then actually doing so), the Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his party has won a nearly 40 percent from the Canadian public surveyed. The full results are as followed:

Conservatives: 39.5%
Liberals: 30.2%
NDP: 18.7 percent
Bloc: 7.7 percent
Greens: 4 percent

This shows a slightly widening gap between the two major parties, and a relative stagnation for the third parties in the running. In the polls on leadership, Michael Ignatieff has seen a nearly 15 point drop in approval, from nearly 55 percent in September, to 39.0% in December (coming in after even Jack Leyton, who holds 41 percent).

Again and again, the question is posed, what is going wrong and what can be done to make it right. Could it be the political wrangling of the Liberals, threatening again and again to bring down the government over this or that point, yet never failing to scupper the chance at the last minute, all the while gaining nothing but flack from the wider Canadian voting public, who didn't even want another election?

Could it be a lack of clear definition between the Liberals and the Conservatives on policy ranging from taxation, to the economy, to social services, to the environment? The parties play their role well, with Liberals portraying themselves as more pro-working class, pro-new arrivals, and generally pro-Progressive, all the while touting plans that don't seem to ever differ all that much from what the Conservatives are rolling out. In the end, the public can see through that, they know what's going on, just as well, perhaps even better, than the insiders in Ottawa...

Québec Liberals betray their own initiative in Social Enterprises

2009-12-22T16:28:00.000-05:00

The Liberal Party of Québec has scrapped a long over-due funding increase, and in fact will phase out that funding all together, to the social enterprises of the nation, those organisations that help seniors with accomplishing their daily tasks. The service was meant to get a 3.5 million dollar injection of capital to help off-set the cost of the service to seniors which usually runs at about 18$ an hour, of which the recepient of the sevice usually pays around half.

Not only will that funding increase not materialise, but now Minister of Social Services Lise Thériault for the government has said that the funding will be allowed to run out completely in April 2010, and from then on the Social Enterprises will have to find their own funding.

This is a huge and disconcerting summersault. The older-generation has a right to be cared for after all they have contributed to society, and these services are highly esential to helping to maintain a Senior's sense of well-being and connectedness to the wider world. The Liberal Party proves once again that it is the party of big business and capitalism, rather than that of the people and social well-being.

Liberal-Péquiste Face-off: Immigration and Identiy

2009-12-22T10:32:00.000-05:00

The Parti Québécois has revealed its proposed legistlative program, and in doing so has thrown down the gauntlet over the two issues most important to the Québécois electorate: National identity and immigration. Among the proposals include a sweeping reform of French language legistlation, mainly aimed to promote the use of la langue among new arrivals in the country.

The PQ plans to force immigrants to learn French before arriving in Québec, and thereafter forcing them to send their children to French-language day-care centres and eventually French CÉGEPS (the two secteurs of education not currently under the reglementation of the Charte de la langue française). The souverainiste party also wants new-comers to continue perfecting their French, and obliging them to join the French speaking business sector rather than working for Anglophone enterprises.

Over the issue of identity, the two parties are squaring off. The Liberal Party government of Québec is currently trying to push through legislation favourising policies that promote cultural diversity and accomodation to the particular needs of the cultural communities of the nation. The PQ for their part would like to see a bill passed underlining that which they feel is most imporant to the Québécois people: Laicité, the primacy of the French language, and the equality between the sexes.

Who will win this debate, at the heart of Québécois politics? Only time will tell...

What was forward for the Liberal Party?...anything but elections...

2009-12-21T11:28:00.000-05:00

Liberal chief Michael Ignatieff seems to have learned his lesson: Canadians want everything, everything but another national election. This pearl was wisdom was apprendred after the 4 bi-elections this past November when his party came 3rd in each one. This electoral defeat followed the August threat of reversing the government with a motion of censure against the government. At the time, the country was still questioning if, and how, it would come through the economic downturn, now believed to be on its way out. The November defeat followed a Spring-Summer period of grace for the Liberals when they consistently outperformed the Tories in polls.

In the meantime, the party, and its leader, have promised to revitalise the party and put an ear to the ground in regards to the great concerns that Canadians hold in the areas of the economy, public service and government effectiveness. This is no small feat in a party as bogged in bureacratism and carearism as the next, where policy is made behind close doors, and flashy initiatives such as the Green Turn garner much attention, but lead to very little concrete support.

So the question must be asked, what way forward for the Liberal Party of Canada? Should they lean to the Left, endorsing NDP-style social democracy, or should they stay truly Liberal, and simply exploit the government's own blundering performance? Either way, it has a long and difficult road ahead if it is to gain support at the next elections, now tentatively slated for 2011 at the earliest.

Secularism and political correctness running rampant in Québec

2009-12-19T10:55:00.000-05:00

The two main Québécois opposition parties, the nationalist Parti Québécois and the right-of-centre Action Démocratique du Québec have come out in support of a ban on all overtly religious symbols for those working in public service. The ban would include the ever more prevalent hijab (Muslim headscarf), the veil, the turban and the kirpan (a ritual knife carried by adherent Sikhs).

The proposed ban would be an outright attack on Cultural Communities which each year make a bigger and bigger contribution to the economic and demographic growth of the country. Though the parties claim that the ban is in the interests of laicité, the concept of secularism, it should be interpreted for what it is: a bulwark of extremism aimed at the denouncement of cultural differences in what is more and more a vibrant and culturally diverse nation.

Those that support the ban claim that the Quiet Revolution and its subsequent changes to Québécois society should have ousted all signs of religiosity from the public sector, that the country did not fight against the yoke of a militant and pervasive Catholicism just to be confronted with an Islamic upsurge in the country 40 years later.

Nothing could be further from the truth. To many Muslims, the hijab or veil is obligatory on them, and further more a representation of a faith that is deeply important to their very social being and psyche. To ban it would be a tragedy and would exclude many Muslim women from working to help provide the services that so many Québécois rely on.

Leil Bdeir, spokeswoman for Présence musulmane, believes that too many people misinterpret everything. «Laicité, that doesn't mean removing every religious symbol from the public sphere. Laicité, it is preventing the values of one religious group reigning supreme over another, its avoiding privelege of one group over another.» [19.12.09 Cyberpresse]

The question must be asked, what is behind this proposed ban? Is it a commitment to laicité, religious freedom, and secularism, or is it a step in the direction of xenophobia, Islamophobia, and social exclusion?

Does economics justify climate change?

2009-12-18T10:47:00.000-05:00

Albertan Premier Ed Stolmach has contested at the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit that without the astronomical revenues from the tar sands of the province, the Canadian economy and the provincial coffres would be in dire straights. According to figures recently released, the oil sands help the province to contribute over 21 billion dollars in transfer payments to Ottawa, more than the entire defense budget of the nation.

It raises an interesting question, just how committed to mitigating climate change if it means that we will suffer economically. Destroying the environment is big business, and goes a long way towards funding the social programmes that all Canadians rely on. Let's be realistic: the mining of this country's natural resources is extremely lucrative, and without it the Canadian economy could very well collapse.

So, what way forward? Should the exploitation of natural resources and the pollution of the environment be curbed for the sake of moral highmindedness and sheer self preservation at the expense of the provincial purse strings?

Provincial Premier Popularity Contest

2009-12-17T13:08:00.000-05:00

A recent poll conducted by Angus Reid reveals the state of popularity of the nation's provincial Prime Ministers. It makes for interesting reading not least when you realise that the country's most and least popular Premiers are both Conservatives, with the most loved being Newfoundland and Labrador Prime Minister Danny Williams and the least liked being Ed Stolmach of Alberta.

The results are as follows:

Danny Williams (Con): Newfoundland and Labrador: 78%
Brade Wall (Sask. Party): Saskatchewan: 58%
Darrell Dexter (NDP): Nova scotia: 43%
Jean Charest (Lib): Québec: 32%
Greg Soulinger (NDP): Manitoba: 29%
Dalton McGuinty (Lib): Ontario: 18%
Ed Stolmach (Con): Alberta: 14%

It just goes to show that in Canadian politics, different shades of Left and Right can play well with the public, and that neither side is especially hated or loved. It's all about who can deliver, and how. Who do you think is the nations best Premier, and why?

Note: At the time of publication the information for PEI and British Columbia were not available

Torture of Afghan Detainees- Did the government ignore warnings

2009-12-16T16:02:00.001-05:00

M. Richard Colvin, who spent over a year in Afghanistan as a diplomat for the Canadian government, has refutted government claims that there were no warnings that there was abuse of detainees in the Afghan prisons under the auspices of the Ottawa.

According to M. Colvin, he sent numerous reports during his tenure as Canadian diplomat in the country, which were systematically ignored by top officials in Afghanistan and Canada alike. The warnings were apparently very explicit, and casts a shadow on the Harper government which maintains that it was unaware of the human rights abuses taking place on their watch.

Could this issue finally be the tipping point which will bring down the Harper administration, after years of mismanagment, negligence and shadowy deal-making? Will the opposition parties step up and demand culpability for these agregious violations of the most basic rights, the very pretence for the continued presence of the Canadian military in Afghanistan? Only time will tell

Suspend parliament...again?

2009-12-16T14:22:00.001-05:00

Rumours have begun circulating that the Prime Minister Stephen Harper will suspend parliament until after the Winter Olympics amid the firestorm over Afghanistan among other controversies. This would be the second time within a year that the PM has taken this course of action, as he made the same manouver last December amid the threats of a reversal of the government at the hands of a proposed Bloc supported Liberal-NDP coalition.

Is this a constutional mis-step, or simply the Prime Minister saving us all a lot of time wrangling over issues that won't be set right for quite a while. Parliament has done little actual work as of late, but should difficult times really be an excuse for the chief of government to shut down parliamentary proceedings until he feels it's the right time for action? Do the Canadian, Québécois, Acadien and First Nations along with the numerous cultural communities not deserve better from their elected government?

Make the wealthy and businesses pay!

2009-12-16T10:41:00.000-05:00

The unions of Québec have taken a step forward in militancy over the past few days, demanding that the Liberal government of Jean Charest place to bill for the funding of state services and the economic recovery program firmly at the feet of the top earners and businesses of the country.

The Secretariate Intersyndical des Services Publiques which counts over 300 000 public sector workers mainly in education, healthcare etc. has also stepped in, proposing six measures to support the economy basically maintaining that priority should be placed on the maintenance and improving of public services rather than over-prioritising budgetary relief. It also proposes 9 concrete steps towards a more sane financing of the public sector:

Renounce hikes in electicity bills
Reclaim what is owed to Québec by the federal government ;
Intensify the fight against tax evasion and offshore tax havens
Increase mining revenues (adding 300 million to the provincial coffres)
Raise taxes for those who earn the most (950 million) ;
Introduce a tax on luxury goods
Levy an additional tax on financial institutions (300 million)
Apply a minimum duty on profit making enterprises (150 million) ;
Place a limit on tax credits for businesses (250 million).

That's almost 2 billion dollars extra the could be put to use for the benefit of the Québécois and the economy! The Interprofessional Federation, mainly representing healthcare workers, has called on the government to make sure that those benefitting most from the economic recovery and the country's general prosperity pay their fare share, rather than placing the burden on the hardest hit and worst off working families who are struggling simply to make ends meet.

These measures should be supported wholeheartedly by those that purport to be leftist of any stage. It is only fair that those that have and continue to benefit from the country's prosperity pay their fair share to help those in need and continue to provide a decent standard of living and public services to all.

Spineless Layton betrays the party, holds grudge against the Liberals

2009-09-20T12:00:00.001-04:00

In an interview with La Presse, Jack Layton, has defended his party's recent parliamentary actions in supporting the Conservative government in the EI confidence vote. While pontificating about his gesture of approval towards the Harper administration, he rejects the claim that he has gone against everything that the party claims to stand for, not to mention making himself and his organisation look like complete hippocrites for constantly attacking the Liberals for their continuous support of the government in no-confidence votes, until now that is...

The Liberal Party took a stand for the working class and those that have lost their jobs by fighting for a true reform for employment insurance and against the continuation of this government. Even as economists claim that green shoots are sprouting economically, the fact is that many thousands more will lose their jobs before the recession starts to lessen in intensity, and that means that Canada needs a comprehensive and generous program to ensure that families can continue to make ends' meet.

The New Democratic Party is nevertheless still the party with the closest links to the working class of Canada and its traditional organisations, the trade unions, however their position on this issue is a complete betrayal to that status. If people are expected to choose between Liberal and NDP, how can they when the two seem to mirror each other in policy and practice...?

In face of govenment represion, the Iranian working-class shows its heroic strength

2009-09-19T11:30:00.000-04:00

On the occasion of Palestine Day in Iran, the Opposition, led by liberal-reformist Mir Hussein Mousavi, and former president Khatami, reared its head once more after months of an apparent bout of silence following the government crackdown on the opposition supporters and their protests after this summers elections. Quds Day (Palestine Day) is a government created holiday to help rally support for itself by showing off it's anti-Semite and «pro-Palestinian» character, however this year it was hijacked by marked violence between hard-line supporters of the current regime, and those that have had enough.

These events clearly demonstrate that the underground opposition movement is far from dead, and that the people of Iran are still motivated by a desire for a radical change in the way society is run. The important thing to remember is that Mir Hussein Mousavi and his entourage are only the catalysts for this desire, that in fact the popular support for the opposition is more a popular-rage against the government. The people of Iran need to channel their ambitions, their raw power, into more productive and militant forms of struggle, such as a revolutionary general strike, if real change is to be effected. Mousavi is not the answer, a change in faces of the president will mean nothing for the people of Iran, short of a symbolic victory for the limited democracy that the Ayatollah so «graciously» permits them.

SAFE: The Conservative Government will survive

2009-09-18T13:59:00.000-04:00

Thanks to the approval of the Bloc Québécois and the NDP concerning the confidance vote regarding the EI reforms proposed by the Conservatives, there will not be another general election in Canada for now, much to the charign of the Liberals...or is it.

In reality, neither the Bloc nor the NDP is ready to fight an election, and to be fair, Canadians have had quite enough of elections, considering that there have been 4 in the past 5 years. However the Liberals took a principles position during this past scene in the EI saga, wanting to topple the government over its flimsy proposals for reform and relief.

Now that the vote of confidence is sorted though, it seems that the Bloc Québécois is dragging it's feet on the passing of the law, while the other parties, including the Liberals, seem to want as quick an ascendance as possible for what is agreed to be an extremely pressing and necessary reform to the regime of unemployment benefits, both short-term and long-term. The Bloc contests that there is too much unknown, too much not spelled out in the plans, too many unanswered questions, too many left out. If that's how they feel, maybe they should have supported the Liberals...

In light of the recession, Labour must be the party of the working class

2009-09-15T21:15:00.000-04:00

The current mood in the trade unions, as reflected with the Chequers summit on Friday and the TUC Congress this week, is one of incresing militancy. If that can filter through to the Labour Party itself, if some of that ethos can be absorbed by the LP then there is a chance that it will take less of a hammering in the upcoming general election.

Today Gordon Brown will for the first time have used the word «cuts», in his adress to the TUC conference. In order to capitalise on the Tories and their «foaming at the mouth» he will have to make it clear that jobs, health, education and other social essentials will be protected, FULL STOP, NO MATTER WHAT.

Brown will also have to expose the Tories and what their real plans are without sounding like a hypocrite (which we all know he is) for endorsing some public spending cuts himself. This will be a tough balancing act, but I think that if the public can see that the Labour Party will at least try to protect their hard fought gains of the working class then there is a chance. Brown has correctly identified waste and inneficiancy as the targets of his spending cuts, while ring-fencing health, education, and front-line policing, something that the Conservative Party has recently seemed to reject.

As the row over spending heats up, it will have to be the base of Labour, that is the working class and their organisations, the trade unions, that must force the party left and make sure that it continues to embody the ethos of a social-democratic party of mass labour.

A multiculturalism for Québec

2009-07-05T10:42:00.000-04:00

If Canada's policy is Multiculturalism, that is, the allowing a distinct group of people to maintain their ways of living within the larger majority culture, has been a cornerstone of home policy for so long, then why has it not been conceded that the province of Québec, encompassing the distinct nation of the Québécois, should not be offered reasonable accommodation in terms of their own application of multiculturalism and related policies?

Should the distinct nation of the Québécois, anchored on the territory of the Québécois territory, in that itself actualises tens of thousands of new arrivals every year, not be given a reasonable amount of autonomy in the areas of culture, integration, and language assimilation?

The Québécois population has, with what some would say good reason, rejected the doctrine of multiculturalism, claiming that it undermines the fragile Québécois identity already threatened on all sides by international conglomerates, media, culture, etc. They see it as essential that immigrants integrate and accept the values that the Québécois hold dear. In fact, there is a government project where as when one enters Québec as an immigrant one signs a statement of common values such as

The primacy of the French language
A free and democratic society
A secular State
A pluralist society
A society grounded in laws and rights that garauntee equality
Gender equality
The excercise of rights is not to be to the harm of others and should be for the general well being

Most would say that the majority of these are Canadian values as well, however these values, though written in a similar manner, take on a different meaning for the Québécois. They are concerned about individual rights, as well as the betterment of society. The right to speak French is at the heart of many people's concerns, and that is the main tusk of the multiculturalism issue.

Just how far should immigrants be pushed to gain knowledge of thier adopted country's language, what should be made available, and how should community languages are accomodated. Québec, though progresive in many areas, and a very accepting and welcoming place, takes a more hard-line approach towards language than in the ROC.

The answers are not hear, but what do you think? Should Québec be allowed to excercise its own multiculturalism, within the Canadian multiculturalist project?

New Labour: Go Back to Basics!

2009-07-03T12:25:00.000-04:00

This country is facing disaster. Finances are wrecked, cuts are coming, services will suffer. There is no way out of this impasse within the market framework, that has been made clear. PM Brown, Leader of the Opposition David Cameron, Chancellor Darling and Shadow Chancellor George Osborne all assure us that we can get through this if we pull together and find some sort of political consensus.

Labour is dropping in the polls, trailing far the Conservatives, neither the government nor the Official Opposition have revealed how they intend to finance the country in the future, and neither is willing to talk straight about the cuts that either government will be forced to make under the current system.

They do not realise that no working-class will give up their rights and privileges, not for any political scheme, not for any public debt. The Winter of Discontent was a clear indicator of the British people in the face of crushing economic defeat. It was ironic that this was during a Labour government. 30 years down the line we find ourselves in a similar situation.

Labour has started to pre-empt the election campaign by launching a non-manifesto «Building Britain's Future» with no less than 14 competences under proposal, including a massive housing building program, a legal obligation for the government's child poverty commitments, healthcare «entitlements», jobs or training for all school leavers etc. Honestly this gives one hope that perhaps the government is listening to the concerns of ordinary Brits who fear their jobs, their homes, their health, their children's opportunities, lost.

However this does not go far enough .The Labour Party is still no longer committed to the nationalisation of the public services that are essential to everyone's well-being. The large scale industries, all public sector enterprises, must be but under democratic workers control, so that they can be held accountable for their actions and so that the public may decide how thier money is used. Only in this way can we work our way out of the crisis, when we start putting the well being of the many rather than the profits of the few, first.

Schools- Public and well funded
Healthcare- No place for private sector
Child poverty- Eliminate now
Unemployment- Massive program of public works
Infrastructure- Massive program of public works
Education- Progressive restructuring of the education system to make sure it is fair, effective, and the valued asset that it is.
Banking and Industry- Nationalise the essential sectors of the economy under workers control

These demands should not shock any Labour supporter, they are the core of what the Labour Party was found on...

End the Monarchy now! Reform the Senate immediately- Abolir la monrachie! Réformer le Sénat maintenant!

2009-07-03T10:32:00.000-04:00

In a recent poll conducted by a Canadian Television company CTV reveals that over 65% of Canadians want the monarchy done away with. This shows the completely progressive nature of the Canadian people who want nothing to do with an out-dated remnant of feudalism which persists in the modern capitalist Canadian federative state. The Queen and her representative Michaelle-Jean, not to mention the provincial governors, who do nothing but represent a long ago broken link between the United Kingdom's monarchy and her Parliament.

However the Monarchy is not the only feudal remnant in the Canadian political system, and that is the appointed Senate, which has much power, and yet is completely unaccountable to the people that they are making the laws for. The Senate should be reformed completely and modelled on more democratic lines so that the officials are elected, by what form the voting to be made taken by Canadians.
------------
Dans un sondage récent révélé par le chaîne de télévision canadienne CTV démonte que 65 percent de canadiens veulent l'abolition de la monarchie. Cela démonte la nature progressive de la population canadienne qui n'en veulent rien avec une relique féodale archaïque qui n'a pas de lien avec la fédération capitaliste moderne canadienne. La Reine et ses répresentants comme Michaelle Jean, et les gouverneurs provincuax, coûtent cher la population canadienne.

Or, la monarchie n'est pas la seule rélique féodale dans le système politique canadien, et cela est le Sénat appointé, qui a beaucoup de pouvoir, mais est complètement inexplicable au peuple pour ceux qu'ils font les lois. Le Sénat doit être reformé complètement et modelé sur un principe plus démocratique pour que les sénateurs soient élus, par quelque forme choisie par le peuple canadien.

Brown betrays the working class with latest Healthcare proposals

2009-06-29T10:53:00.000-04:00

The New Labour government of Gordon Brown has unveiled its latest commitment to the destruction of the National Health Service, that is the commercialisation of critical treatments disguised as a gesture for patients rights. The new responsibilities of the National Health Service include:

An operation within 18 weeks of patients first seeing their GP
A free health check-up for all at the age of 40
Treatment from an NHS dentist
Die at home if they suffer from a long-term medical condition
See a cancer specialist within two weeks
Be treated in accident & emergency departments within four hours.

It is the first and penultimate pledges where the government seeks to allow the encroachment of the private sector onto an already burdened NHS instead of actually improving it and providing for the next generation of healthcare that is equitable, efficient, and free at the point of need. The proposals allow, and in some cases would necessitate, the use of private sector treatment where NHS care is lacking, paid for by the government budget. Cancer patients and those in need of operations could be forced to use private healthcare services instead of their right to access on the National Health Service.

In fact, the British Medical Association, which is holding its annual conference in Liverpool this week, will be tabling an industrial-action motion which could provoke strike action over the governments proposals to widen private sector involvement in the health service. While the doctor's leaders are begging for them to back down, the physicians mood is militant and they can see clearly that what these new plans mean is the beginning a large-scale corruption of the NHS by the private sector.

The NHS was a hard-fought gain made by the working class and pioneered by its political organisation, the Labour Party. That was over 60 years ago. To see a Labour government opening up the health service to market forces in a way which Lady Thatcher would never have dared is truly outrageous and a clear betrayal to the working-class base of the Labour Party. And yet this is just one in a string of anti-Socialist, anti-working class measures taken by the New Labour government.

What is needed is a return to the principles of the NHS, to an equitable society, to socialism!

Get used to minority governments... and you can blame the Bloc!

2009-06-28T11:45:00.000-04:00

In times past minority governments were seen as a rare event in Canadian political history, lately, they seem more like the rule. In the past decade we have seen 3 minority governments, with a fourth one likely after the next election. In fact, political commentators are now projecting that minority governments will govern the country for a majority of the time, mainly due to the neutralising effect of the Bloc Québécois, and the unity of the Conservative Party (as opposed to its divisions during the first years of the Bloc, which guaranteed the Liberals of Jean Chrétien 3 consecutive victories).

Québec has 75 ridings and the Bloc regularly wins a majority of these, sending a progressive, though souverainiste, voice to Ottawa. Though forever condemned to a back-seat role in Canadian politics precisely because of their constitutional position and more importantly their localised level of support (only Alberta residents support the Bloc outside of Québec), the Bloc Québécois nevertheless has succeeded in making its influence felt in the House of Commons, providing support and leadership on a number of issues that are important not only to the Québécois but to Canadians as a whole.

Currently Bloc is polling at around 38 percent in Québec, the Liberals at 35 percent, and 15 percent for the Conservatives, 10 percent for the NDP. Compare that to Ontario, with its 106 members in the Parliament, where Liberals and Conservatives are neck and neck in the polls at around 40 percent each, with most of the Conservative gains being made at the expense of the New Democratic Party and the Green Party of Canada, a much more traditional state of affairs in Canada, and one that, in general, largely reflects the national scene, where the Lib-Con split is only 4 percentage points at 36 v. 32 percent.

This demonstrates the impact that the Bloc has in siphoning off support from the Liberals and Conservatives (depending on who is in favour) in Québec. Far from serving their original purpose, that of advancing the cause of independence in the Canadian Parliament, the Bloc actually prevents issues important to the Québécois from being resolved, those constitutional issues which constitute a large part of the grievances for many indépendantistes, though minority governments have sometimes managed to push through impressive reforms in other areas.

One wonders how much longer the political maturing process of the Bloc Québécois will take before they can become sensible players in the House of Commons, and start considering the possibility of forming coalitions or at least being an unofficial partner in a progressive minority government. Until then, we can take a moment to appreciate the role of the Bloc Québécois and its role in Canadian politics...

Ignatieff drops in popularity among Québécois

2009-06-22T15:27:00.001-04:00

The Liberal Party of Canada's newly crownded leader has since his rise to power polled strongly among the Québécois electorate, however recently his popularity has fallen by 10 percent, from around 45 percent believing him to be the best choice for prime minister, to a much lower, comparitively, 35 percent. This may have something to do with the Bloc Québécois sustained attacks against Ignatieff, claiming that he opposed C-307 which would have extend the Charter of the French Language (Loi 101) to all federal undertakings in the province, as well as a commitment generally not to interfere at all in its implemetion.

The vote came and the Liberals and Tories voted against it so it's pretty much a done deal. But that doesn't mean that this is the end of his fall in popularity. The Bloc has a way of trying to convince the electorate that no one else care's about Québec, and to be honest attacking him on the issue of French langue was brilliant. This issue only has so much steam,but it is yet to be seen whether or not M. Ignatieff can regain the support of the Québécois people.
-----------
Le nouveau chef du Parti Libéral du Canada a vu une grande hausse de sa popularité au Québec depuis son couronnement, or récemment les répondants des sondages misent moins confiance au leader libéral. En avril, il a gagné 45 percent des Québécois sur la question «qui serait le meilleur Premier Ministre». Maintenant on voit une chute de 10 points à 35 percent. Peut-être cet effondrement est à cause des pubs anti-libéraux du Bloc. Le Bloc soulignait ce dernier mois le fait que les libéraux, comme les conservateurs, voteraient contre C-307, un projet de loi qui répandrait les provisions de la Charte de la langue française à tous entreprises et projets fédéraux, et préviendrait l'interférence d'Ottawa dans l'implémentation de la Charte sur territoire québécois.

Quand le jour du vote est venu, tel que prévu, les libéraux et torys ont bloqué le projet, maintenant c'est fini, c'est ça. Or, cela n'est pas nécessairement la fin de sa chute de popularité. Le Bloc joue toujours sa tactique habituelle, celui qui essaye de convaincre la populace québécoise que personne ne s'occupe le Québec sauf que le Bloc, et que le ROC est un ennemi du Québec. Il était brillant pour lui attaquer sur l'enjeu de la langue, qui est au cœur des préoccupations des Québécois. Cet enjeu essoufflera bientôt, mais il n'est pas clair si la chute de M. Ignatieff suivra ou non.

Liberals hesitate in run-up to the confidence vote

2009-06-15T16:27:00.000-04:00

The Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has outlined his requirements for support of the government on this week's upcoming Commons vote on the budgetary credits for the Conservative government, which will also be a vote of confidence in the government and will decide whether or not there will be elections this summer. M. Ignatieff has plainly said that he does not want elections, but will not let the government stand if it does not fix the problems in its currents policy, especially concerning Unemployment Insurance and medical isotopes.

Ignatieff has told the government that it must replace the current unemployment insurance scheme with one that has a flat rate of hours worked required to qualify for benefit for the entire nation, rather than varying from region to region based on the unemployment rate as is currently the system. Concerning medical isotopes the Liberals want a concrete plan on the lack of the substance used to detect cancer, and which is experiencing a crisis of supply world-wide.

The Bloc and the NDP have already stated their intention to vote against the budgetary credits, they are ready and rearing for an election. Though most Canadians probably have election fatigue, it is right that the Liberal leader should take a principled stance on the important issues that face the nation, such as jobs, healthcare, services, and infrastructure. If the government does not respond adequately, it should be brought down.

Do not let the government stand! Faites tomber le gouvernement!

2009-06-13T15:50:00.003-04:00

Nanos-La Presse has conducted a survey of Canadians on the general view of the Conservative government. The results are not good news for the Conservative Party, and especially not good for Prime Minister Harper. Without being prompted towards any answer, the poll found that

65% can name a fault of the government spontaneously,
35% can name a quality of the government spontaneously
and most worrying for the Tories:
20% think the government has not positive side

This news isn't surprising to anyone but the Conservatives. Their inability to lead the country through the economic crisis, their brutality towards the working-class and the unemployed, and their utter contempt for the will of the Canadian electorate, all mean that the Tory administration no longer has any credibility. This minority government has no popular support, and should be brought down immediately before they are allowed to do anymore damage to the nation.

The fate of the nation is in the hands of Liberals, it is the choice of the Parliamentary Liberal Party whether we will see a government that cares about ordinary Canadians and their standards of living, their jobs, their essential services. The government can not be allowed to stand, M. Ignatieff should instruct his MPs not to vote for the budget credits!
----
Nanos-La Presse a mené un sondage sur la perception générale des Canadiens à propos du gouvernement conservateur. Les résultats ne sont pas de bonnes nouvelles pour le Parti Conservateur, surtout pour Premier Ministre Harper. Sans être suscité vers aucune suggestion, les répondants ont dit:

65 percent peut nommer une lacune du gouvernement conservateur spontanément
35 percent peut nommer une qualité du gouvernement
mais plus ennuient pour le Parti Conservateur:
20% ne pensent pas que le gouvernement n'a pas aucune côté positive

Ces nouvelles sont pas étonnant que pour les conservateurs. Leur incapacité de diriger le pays pendant la crise économique, leur brutalité vers la classe ouvrière et les chômeurs, et leur mépris pour la volonté de l'électorat canadien, signifient que l'administration tory n'a plus de crédibilité. Ce gouvernement minoritaire n'a plus de soutien populaire, et doit être fait à tomber immédiatement avant qu'il puisse faire plus de destruction.

Le sort du pays canadien reste aux mains des libéraux, il est le choix du Parti Libéral parlementaire si nous verrons un gouvernement qui s'occupe des Canadiens ordinaires et leur niveau de vie, leurs emplois, leurs services essentielles. Le gouvernement ne peut pas être permis de continuer d'exister, M. Ignatieff doit demander ses membres du Parlement de ne pas voter pour le crédits budgétaires!

It's up to you M. Ignatieff- C'est à vous M. Ignatieff

2009-06-12T12:59:00.000-04:00

The political power of the Canadian confederation rests yet again in the hands of one man, Michael Ignatieff, and his party, the Liberals. The upcoming vote on budget credits has already been opposed by the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, so it is entirely up to the Liberals whether the minority Conservative government survives this vote of confidence.

We've gone through this plenty of times, and again and again the politologues weigh up the possibility of an election verses the prospect of supporting the Conservatives disatrous policies. In this case it is over the inability of the Harper government to support workers and the economy during the economic crisis. Who knows what they will decide, but one can be sure it will be thoroughly calculated. And yeah, probably they will support the government.
-----
Le pouvoir politique reste une autre fois aux mains libérales et leur leader M. Michael Ignatieff. Le vote vienant sur les crédits budgétaires est déjà opposé par les népédistes et bloquistes, donc il est complètement la décision des libéraux si le gouvernement minoritaire conservateur survive ce vote de confiance.

On a vu cette situation plusieurs fois, encore et encore les politologues évaluent la possibilité d'une élection contre le prospecte de soutenir la politique désastreux conservateur. Dans cette case la question est l'incapacité du gouvernement Harper de soutenir les travailleurs et l'économie pendant la crise économique. On sait qu'est-ce qu'ils décideront, mais on peut être sûr qu'il sera bén calculé.

What way forward for Labour?

2009-06-12T09:56:00.000-04:00

What Labour needs is a return to its roots: the working class. Without the working class the Labour party has no chance. The wage slaves of Great Britain are united by their economic role in production, their close proximity, their constant interaction and dealings. They are united in their role as the productive force in the economy, the oppressed, the cheated, the lied to. The Labour Party was begun as a mass party of organised Labour, and although the unions, largely taken over by the bureaucrats of the right-wing, still play a role in government policy, the truth is that this link is very nearly cut in proportion to the influence they once had.

The working class, their interests are common: housing, jobs, education, pensions, healthcare, social security, local safety, etc. These problems can only be alleviated in one way, and that is through the democratic planning and control of the economy by the working class, that is, the majority of the population. The status quo where we elect every few years a representative to the bourgeois state is not satisfactory and as of late has been proven to be positively rotten to the core.

However the first step is a return to traditional socialist values in the Labour Party, as represented by the Labour Representation Committee, which seeks to promote socialist policy in Parliament and the public. Their growth could be instrumental in the growth of a left wing in the party, corresponding to a growth of a left current in the unions. The results could be disastrous for Gordon and his friends, but tremendous for the working majority of British people.

The Labour Party could easily win a general election if it fought on the program of democratic nationalisation of the major industries and banks, the provision of free life-long education, quality healthcare, and a generous employment program. If the Left grows strong enough become a force, this is very possible.

Labour has made mistakes since its inception, lets start to correct these by taking an indepenent class-based perspective on politics and policy.

Québécois don't want sovereignty- Les Québécois ne veulent pas la souveraineté

2009-06-11T16:10:00.000-04:00

The Québécois population has spoken on sovereignty. They don't want it. They do however want more autonomy for Québec in areas such as economy, taxes, culture, agriculture and immigration. Angus-Reid-La Presse conducted a survey of nearly 1 000 Québécois(es) and found that:

74% of Québécois judge the chances of independence as reasonably, or completely unlikely
15% think that Québec has a good enough chance of separating
5% believe that Québec will separate

This is not exactly a surprise for anyone in Québec, and it only reveals that the semi-autonomiste proposals of the PQ are well-placed for support among Québécois. 63% of the respondents believe that Québec should remain within Canada, although many support more powers for the Québécois state. Only 28% believe that Québec should be independent, down from a high of 40% a month ago (if one is not mistaken).

This shows how the dominance of the Parti Québécois in souverainiste politics has completely watered-down the independent movement and its very spirit. The electorate are less ready than ever for sovereignty, they recognise that they are better off within Canada. And that is the truth, that only with the help and collaboration of their Anglo neighbors can the Québécois shed the oppression which plagues them.

Meanwhile the Liberals have accused the Parti Québécois of trying to provoke a political crisis and there have been warnings that the PQ's plan would necessitate a rehashing of the constitutional debate. Marois doesn't admit to wanting a crisis, however that would be the inevitable conclusion of this excecise, and at that point the PQ could argue that Ottawa is now oppressing them as they always have and that it is time for sovreignty. What they really mean is: we want a larger role for the Québécois bourgeois state and corporations in the country. The PQ chefs most likely in fact don't want sovreignty, it is far more feasible politically to try to find a reasonable accommodation within the confederation, which is exactly what they are doing.

La population québécoise a parlé sur la souveraineté. Ils ne la veulent pas. Or, ils soutiennent plus d'autonomie pour le Québec dans les compétences telles que l'économie, l'agriculture, la culture, et l'immigration. Angus-Reid-La Presse a fait un sondage qui a révélé que:

74 percent des Québécois jugent l'indépendance relativement, ou complètement, irréaliste
15 percent croient que le Québec a une bonne occasion de se séparer
5 percent pensent que le Québec se séparera du Canada.

Cela n'est pas exactement étonnant pour ceux qui habitent sur la territoire québécoise, et il révèle que le projet semi-autonomistes du PQ sont bén-placé pour soutien parmi les Québécois. 63 percent des répondants croient que le Québec doit rester au sein du Canada, or, beaucoup appuient plus de pouvoirs pour l'état québécois. Seul 28 per cent croient que le Québec doit être indépendant, une chute de le hauteur de 40 per cent.

Ceci démontre comment la dominance du Parti Québécois dans la politique souverainiste a complètement détruit le mouvement indépendantiste et son propre esprit. L'électorat est moins prêt que jamais pour la souveraineté, ils reconnaissent qu'ils sont meilleurs au sein du Canada. Et cela est la vérité, que seulement avec l'aide de leurs voisins Anglophones que nous pouvons rompre avec l'oppression qui nous souffrent.

Cependant les libéraux ont accusé le PQ d'essayer à provoquer une crise politique et il y avait des menaces que le plan péquiste nécessiterait un rechauffage du débat constitutionnel. Marois n'admet pas vouloir une crise, or c'est la conclusion inévitable de cet excercise, et le PQ pointerait vers l'oppression d'Ottawa du peuple québécois qu'existait toujours, et arguerait que c'est le temps pour la souveraineté. Qu'est-ce que ça veut dire vraiment: les dirigeants du PQ veulent un plus grand rôle pour la bourgeoisie et politiciens natives québécois au sein de la confédération, ils désirent un accommodement raisonnable parmi les autres provinces du Canada.

Step by step to sovereignty says Marois

2009-06-08T15:02:00.000-04:00

Pauline Marois has given a discourse recently to her party on the new souverainiste strategy for independence, elaborating on her earlier remarks about increasing responsibilities for the Québec state from the federal government. She has sad that she would like to mobilise the Québécois nation for a re-energizing of itself through a revendication of powers from Ottawa.

This goes perfectly with the current paradigm and strategy reigning in the mainstream independence movement. They have but real independence on the back-burner and made it clear that they are in no state to fight for it, despite polling close to the Liberal Party of Québec in recent surveys and getting nearly 41 percent in support of sovereignty.

This is a betrayal of the movement, and quite frankly a spineless cop-out. The hard-line sovereignty movement is up in arms over Marois' plans, they see them as meaningless. In fact they simply prove what many have known for a long time: that the Parti Québécois is simply seeking a reasonable accommodation within the Canadian confederation. They actually have a lot more in common with the Liberals than they'd like to think...

A majority of Canadians find Ignatieff attacks ineffective, if not repulsive

2009-06-08T12:19:00.001-04:00

A recent poll of voters has found that 61 percent of the Canadian public think that Stephen Harper's recent attacks on the Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff as out of touch with Canada and its needs, are ineffective, and a further 65 percent actually take a negative view on the Conservatives because of these ads. The way in which the Conservatives have handled themselves is deplorable as of late. Recoiling behind pseudo-autonomoust proclamations of an «open federalism, while trying to white wash over a 50 bn dollar budget deficit by attacking the Oppossition on a personal level is surprisingly below even the Tory party.

Though Michael Ignatieff isn't the most capable of leaders, he is the chosen leader of the party, and those in that party of right to rally around him. The simple fact is that plenty of ordinary Canadians see this sort of tabloid antics as cheap and taudry. Harper should stop focusing on the deficiencies of certain personalities in the Oppossition and start worrying about the glaring holes in their so called comprehensive policy for economic recovery.

This is the attack ad:

The following is a rebuttal to the attack by Ignatieff:

Ignatieff thinks the Confederation has got it just right

2009-06-07T13:18:00.001-04:00

After an assembly of Liberal Party militants in Montréal this past week, M. Ignatieff accorded an exclusive interview to La Presse, one of the two main Québécois sources of print news. In it he made his position on the federal-provincial power-sharing process quite clear. He thinks it is at a sensible equilibrium and that the provinces and federal government both have a sufficient amount of powers to operate to the best of their abilities.

Ignatieff said that he «doesn't see the need to increase the centralising power of the federal government, nor the power of the provinces». That is quite a different picture from the «centraliser» Liberal that he is painted as by Prime Minister Harper. It is clear that the Liberal Party, or at least its leader, is happy with the present arrangments. Obviously a Liberal government won't be negotiating with a future PQ government on increased competencies for the provincial government...

EI Leyton recoils- AE Leyton recule

2009-06-01T13:22:00.002-04:00

A tactical betrayal of the Canadian working class has been committed by the NDP Leader Jack Leyton who has made it clear that we could not support any toppling of government by the Liberal Opposition over Employment Insurance. Though this is a far from a fore-gone conclusion, there prospect of a new general election triggered over the issue of the rights of the unemployed to subsistence and a decent quality of life. The Liberal leaders have talked tough about EI, we will see just how far they are willing to go.

The NDP is playing a dangerous game right now. It is pandering to their tactical political interest by not supporting a new general election. Whatever their claims that a general election is not welcome in Canada, it is clear that this is a decisive issue, that of Employment Insurance. The NDP is supposed to be the party of labour, of the working-class, or social justice. How can they stand aside and let the Liberal Party out manouver them on their own turf, that of social reform.

Un trahison ouverte à la classe ouvrière canadienne était perpétué par le leader népédiste Jack Leyton qui a fait clair que le caucus néo-démocratique n'appuierait pas aucune mesure qui suivrait vers une nouvelle élection sur l'enjeu de l'assurance emploi. Il étonne que les chefs libéraux ont parlé forts à propos de leur obligation à la cause des chômeurs, en fait plus forts que le NPD mais on va voir si ça est la vérité.

Le NPD joue un jeu dangereux maintenant. Il flatte à leur intérêt politique tactique quand il soutient pas une nouvelle élection générale s'il est nécessaire. Il n'importe rien leurs revendication qu'une élection n'est pas soutenu par le public, mais il est clair que cet enjeux est décisive. Le NPD doit être la parti des travailleurs, de la classe ouvrière, de la justice sociale. Comment abandonner leur propre espace de compétence pour les libéraux?

Parti Québécois' new strategy puts independence on hold/ Nouveau plate-forme du Parti Québecois met la souveraineté en suspense

2009-06-01T11:21:00.003-04:00

The Parti Québécois has unveiled its new sovereignty platform which instead of outright independence, or even a sovereignty association, has adopted some-what adéquiste autonomist proposals for patriating certain powers to Québec. These include measures in the areas of culture, taxation (including the monumental historical injustice of Québécois having to file TWO!!!!! separate tax return) and agriculture among others.

This is a pure abandonment of the independence movement of which the Parti Québécois claims to be leader. The betrayal of the hopes of millions of Québécois for sovereignty is a demonstration of the real aims of the Parti Québécois, which is to find a reasonable accommodation for the native Québécois bourgeoisie within the Canadian confederation.

The party leaders and policy makers are following the political tradition of incompetence and divisiveness in political affairs. The only true gestures for sovereignty on the part of the PQ has been the projects for a Québécois Constitution and Citizenship. One must admit that at first the proposals seemed progressive and a good idea, however in hindsight it is clear that these policies serve only to further the nationalistic agenda of the Parti Québécois, seeking to enforce upon the people of Québec what they think the Québécois want, as per usual.

The only real way for true independence of Québec from foreign dominance and imperialism is for a nation-wide (that is Canadian-wide) fight for socialism where no nationality will be subject to the will of another. If the Québécois people do choose independence, that is their right. But it should be said that Québec will not be free on a capitalist basis, and that on a socialist basis the workers of Québec would probably see far more in-common with the Anglophone workers around them in the ROC and the United States than they do with their native bosses and capitalists and would see the benefits of a free union of Socialist Republics.

Et en français:

Le Parti Québécois a dévoilé son nouveau plate-forme souverainiste qui, au lieu d'une geste vers l'indépendance, ou même moins une association-souveraine, il a choisi un série de proposes autonomistes (à l'ADQ) pour faire la répatriation des certains pouvoirs au Québec. Les plans inclurent mesures dans l'arène de la culture, les impôts (ça inclut l'injustice historique monumentale que les Québécois doivent remplir DEUX différentes formes pour faire les impôts) et l'agriculture, parmi les autres.

Cela est une pure abandonnement du mouvement indépendantiste, le même mouvement de qui le PQ prétend à être leader. La trahison de l'espoir des millions des Québécois pour la souveraineté est une démonstration claire des vrais intérêts du Parti Québécois, qui recherche un accommodement plus raisonnable parmi la confédération canadienne.

Les dirigeants du Parti et les apparatchiks de politique suivent la tradition politique d'incompétente et réfractaire dans les affaires du groupe. Les seuls vrais gestes vers la souveraineté du PQ étaient les projets pour la constitution québécoise et la citoyenneté québécoise. Il faut qu'on admis qu'à première voie les proposes paraissaient progressive et de bonnes idées. Or, rétrospectivement il est clair que la politique sert seulement pour avancer l'agenda nationaliste du Parti Québécois, comme d'habitude, essayent d'exclure et de renforcer les valeurs et la politique que les leaders croient que sont voulus par le public.

Le seul chemin pour un véritable indépendance du Québec de la dominance étrangère et l'impérialisme est une lutte unie des peuples du Canada, sans égard à leur nationalité ou origine ethnique pour le socialisme, pour une société où aucune nationalité sera subjuguée à la volonté d'un autre. Si les Québécois choisissent l'indépendance, cela est leur droite.

Or on devrait dire que le Québec libre ne sera pas s'il est bâti sur une base capitaliste, et plus, dans une société socialiste les Québécois préféraient probablement une fédération volontaire avec ses compatriotes anglophones au Sud, Est, et Ouest.

Ignatieff lays down his plans in face of budget deficit-Ignatieff dévoile son plan de rélance après le nouveau déficit

2009-05-31T14:23:00.001-04:00

Free national child-care, a reopening of the Kelowna accord, a high-speed rail-link between Québec City and Windsor, a fairer Unemployment Insurance regime. These are just some of the promises made by the Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff in the wake of the 50 billion dollar budget deficit announced by Finance Minister Flaherty last week. This is quite a fair bit of investment in the livlihoods of ordinary Canadians across the confederation. Ignatieff must continue to push the envelope, and not let up on his critique and correction of the Canadian Conservative Party which continues to put the jobs and survival of families in peril through its mismanagment of government.

During a time of financial crisis, it is essential that the government continue to take steps to improve the infrastructure and services in the country, because it is at that time that they are most needed. Slashing public-spending is not the answer. However neither are the piecemeal reforms proposed by the Liberal Party.

What is needed is a radical break with the status quo. The time has come for a fair tax system that takes from the wealthiest and provides for the poorest and adequately funds the essential services. Military spending must be slashed to provide for the needs of the working Canadians, as well as increased aid to poorer countries. Workers must have the right to strike and occupy. There ought to be a sliding-scale of wages. These are just a few of the comprehensive measures that need to be taken to raise the standard of living for all and build a more just and equitable society.

En français:

Garderies sans frais, une ouverture de l'accord Kelowna, un train à haute vitesse dans le corridor Québec-Windsor, un régime d'assurance d'emploi plus équitable et juste. Tel sont les promisses faits par le leader libéral fédéral M. Michael Ignatieff dans l'ombre d'un déficit de plus de 50 milliards dollars, annoncé par Ministre de Finance Flaherty. Ceci est une juste somme d'investissement dans la qualité de vie des Canadiens et leurs emplois. Il faut que Ignatieff continue de pousser les enjeux et pas ralentir sur son critique et correction de M. Harper et son agenda conservateur qui suit avec la mise en péril du niveau de vie des Canadiens.

Pendant une crise financière, il est essentiel que le gouvernement suive avec les mesures pour améliorer l'infrastructure et services sociaux au pays, parce que c'est exactement maintenant qu'ils sont les plus obligés. Coupant les dépenses publiques n'est pas la riposte. Or, ni sont les réformes abstraites du Parti Libéral.

Il faut que nous rompions avec le statut quo. L'heure est arrivée pour un système de taxes qui prend de plus riches et fournit les plus pauvres adéquatement et les services essentiels. Dépenses militaires doivent être réduits pour fournir les besoins des travailleurs, et aussi une hausse dans l'aide humanitaire. Les travailleurs doivent avoir le droite de grever et occuppier. Il oblige une système de salaire sur une échelle-mobile.

Employment Insurance Saga may provoke a general election

2009-05-27T13:27:00.000-04:00

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff is beating the war drums as he hints that he is willing to provoke another general election over the issue of unemployment insurance. Apparently he sees it as so essential during the economic crisis that he is willing to go to the polls for that very reason, even while the NDP and Bloc Québécois politicians have recoiled in fear at the possibility. Ignatieff is quoted as saying:

I can foresee it and I can foresee it in the near future. But I repeat the word foresee,” he told reporters. “Let me say it again so it's perfectly clear: I am trying to make Parliament work for Canadians, number one. Number two, I am trying to get EI improved for all Canadians. [Globe and Mail, 26.5.09]

The way in which the Harper regime has handled the crisis is deplorable, and the Employment Insurance issue is its most shameful betrayal of the the Canadian working class. The Liberal Party is right to push this issue incessantly, and to, if necessary, act in their role as Official Opposition and vote down this parliament. The NDP and Bloc should be supporting this bold move. Of course, the opinion polls do help the Liberals in making these threats, as they seem to be on course to form a government...

Opposition parties unite for workers' rights!

2009-05-18T11:25:00.000-04:00

The Bloc Québécois has introduced, with the support of the other Opposition parties in Parliament, a bill that would prohibit employers from implementing the policy of using strike-breakers (or «scabs»). Bill C-386, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (replacement workers), is summarised as follows:

The purpose of this enactment is to prohibit employers under the Canada Labour Code from hiring replacement workers to perform the duties of employees who are on strike or locked out. It extends the obligation to maintain essential services.
The enactment also provides for the imposition of a fine for an offence.

It is just and right to introduce this new law. As it stands, the hard-won right to strike is greatly obstructed by government and union bureaucracy, not to mention the obvious trickery and underhandedness of the bosses. One of the main obstacles to a successful work-stoppage is the use of strike-breakers, and this practice should rightly be curbed.

One hopes that the Liberals, who were the party that stipulated the essential services exception, will throw their full support behind it, and not just waiting and words. The Opposition has more than enough MPs to pass this vote, and if it means reversing the government, if it comes to that, well so be it. Harper needs to learn that the Left can unite to achieve.

Employment Insurance Saga: Beating the war drums

2009-05-15T11:14:00.001-04:00

Michael Ignatieff has reiterated his threats to topple the Conservative government if it does not unveil a new employment insurance program by the summer. saying that parliamentary work is not tenable while the current benefit system is in place. Harper has already said that he is not afraid of the prospect of a new election, despite Tory losses on a national scale, and that the Liberal plan is untenable.

M Ignatieff is correct to contest this issue in the most serious of manners. The Conservative government has done absolutely nothing for workers who have lost their jobs, nor have they moved to protect jobs at risk of being lost. The administration has set a new threshold for being uncaring and insensitive to the needs of the working class.

As leaders of the Opposition, the Liberals have a duty to point out the flaws of Conservative policy and its significant shortcomings. However findings show that Canadians are weary of elections, and that they would prefer for the current parliament to get on with the work of leading the country through the economic crisis. However, it would be silly to think that any of the parties could currently offer a way out. The NDP plan is most generous and Liberals should put their political differences aside and fight for the needs of Canadian workers.

Harper gets tough/stupid on Emloyment Insurance

2009-05-14T11:00:00.000-04:00

Prime Minister Harper has astounded his opponents and supporters alike by threatening a general election in the face of Liberal demands for a reduction in the work hours threshold to be eligible for unemployment benefits. The current proposals would reduce the number of hours to 360 throughout Canada, and bring employment insurance to over 150 000 Canadians who currently are without any support.

Harper's people claim that he isn't opposed to all change to the unemployment benefits regime, just the ones that the Liberals are proposing. Of course not, why should the Conservatives waste a perfectly good opportunity to take credit for something that their opponents initiated. They will simply bide their time and come out with a watered down version of the Liberal Plan, most likely to do with a modification of the current formula, probably taking out the regional unemployment rate out of the equation.

However the fact that the Conservatives have the gall to pretend that they are ready for another election shows how out of touch with reality they truly are. Though Stephen Harper is widely preferred to M. Ignatieff, his party is not. The Conservatives are losing support in all their traditional areas of strength, including Québec. And all that on top of the fact that most Canadians are weary of another election in such a short amount of time, especially considering that the last one solved nothing...

Québec's adoption of the cap-and-trade scheme and its pitfalls

2009-05-13T11:02:00.000-04:00

Québec Liberals seem to be taking the initiative that they were previously known for, and going on the offensive against the Harper government, with its flagrant neglect of environmental issues. Québec, under the Liberal government of Jean Charest, will join with Ottawa and British Columbia in a the cap-and-trade emissions scheme known as the Western Climate Initiative, which will be done through mainly through the Montréal Carbon Stock Exchange. Québec has set its goal of reduction to 15% of 2005 levels by the year 2020.

Cap-and-trade is in itself a cop-out, and a serious let down to anyone with an environmental conscience. That companies are free to simply buy the right to pollute more than they are already ridiculously allowed by law to do, is ludicrous. What we need is a cap policy, where companies have strict guidelines and they must follow them to the letter, or else face serious penalties and legal ramifications. Also, the target for reductions needs to be much more ambitious. Yes, we are facing an economic crisis, however does that mean that our priorities are thrown out the window? No! Québécois have a strong ecological awareness and deserve to see their government acting as it should, as stewards of the territory of Québec.

The workers of Québec are on the march! Les travailleurs québécois prennent le chemin!

2009-05-12T13:21:00.001-04:00

A huge step forward has taken place today in the movement of Québécois workers. Québéc's 3 largest unions, along with 4 others, representing more than half a million members, have joined forces to form a Common Front to fight the Charest government for the rights of the public sector workes, who consistently make less than their private sector counterparts. Their objective: an 11.25 percent salary increase over the next 3 years.

The magnitude of this unification is immense. The people of Québec have suffered at the hands of the union in-fighting that has plagued the labour movement since its beginning. The only time the workers organisations stopped their peti battles was during the heroic and revolutionary Common Front of the early 1970's. They consistently critiscised the capitalist system and the Parti Québécois, however after the defeat of the Common Front, most of that revolutionary sentiment was swamped up by the bourgeois PQ, and directed towards a nationalist goal.

One can only hope that this is the beginning of the end of the divisions that have made the labour movement of Québec so powerless in the face of extreme advances against the workers by the capitalists and their friends in the government. The last Common Front signaled the most revolutionary period in the history of Québec. On peut rêver...

En français:

Une grande gestion progressive s'y est passé dans le mouvement ouvrière au Québec. Les trois plus grands syndicats québécois, et quatre autres, qui représentent ensemble presque un demi-million travailleurs, se sont unis pour former un Front Commun pour lutter le gouvernement de M. Charest pour les droits des travailleurs de l'état, qui gagne moins que leurs compatriotes dans le secteur privé. Le but: Une hausse de 11.25 percent de salaire sur les trois ans suivants.

La magnitude de cette unification est immense. Le peuple du Québec ont souffrent à cause des batailles entre les grands syndicats qui a harcelé le mouvement laborieuse depuis sa naissance. La seule occasion quand les organisations des travailleurs se sont stoppés avec leurs petits disputes était avec la formation du Front Commun héroique et révolutionnaire des années 70. Le Front a critiqué systématiquement le système capitaliste et le Parti Québécois. Or, après la défaite du Front Commun, la plupart du sentiment révolutionnaire a été pris par le PQ bourgeois, et le dirigé vers un but nationaliste.

On peut espérer que ceci est le commencement de la fin des divisions qui ont fait le mouvement travailliste du Québec tellement impuissant à face des attaques belligérants contre les travailleurs par les capitalistes et leurs amis dans le gouvernement. Le dernier Front Commun a marqué la période la plus révolutionnaire à travers l'histoire du Québec, on peut rêver que c'est un nouveau début.

Mais la chose plus la plus important maintenant pour les travailleurs et leurs organisations, est l'affiliation à Québec Solidaire, le seul parti dans le cadre politique du Québec qui représente les intérêts de la classe ouvrière, et pas les capitalistes et petits-bourgeois comme le PQ. Québec Solidaire est dans un stage formative, mais il peut bel et bien diriger le mouvement ouvrière vers la victoire, avec un leadership correct et une conscience de classe claire.

La langue, les lois, et les divisions qu'ils font

2009-05-10T15:03:00.000-04:00

À travers l'histoire du Québec, il exista toujours un débat à propos du futur du français, sa primauté dans la société, et la francisation des nouveaux arrivants. Après la révolution démocratique nationale des années 60, qui s'appelait tranquille, les québécois se sont dirigés vers une politique linguistique forte, qui servait à protéger la langue, mais aussi vers une politique qui a servi pour plus diviser les citoyens du Québec sur les lignes ethno-linguistiques et s'enrichir les exploiteurs.

Le désir des québécois pour être maitres chez-nous a été reflété dans la politique linguistique depuis ces grands changements aux fondements de la société. Les demandes pour promouvoir le français d'un état opprimé par la dominance d'anglais dans l'économie et société en général, à une langue brillante et puissante, allaient au cœur de l'épreuve nationale des québécois.

Ce n'est pas étonnant. La langue est, normalement, une caractéristique intégral du concept d'une nation. Elle unifie les gens avec une bonde commune, elle leur donne une identité distinctive. Elle devient une partie sacrée de la conscience nationale. Mais il faut, surtout au Québec, qu'on se souvienne qu'aucune langue doit avoir hégémonie sur l'autre, il s'agit comme une autre forme de l'oppression ethnique. Pour accepter la dominance d'une communauté linguistique sur l'autre est impensable, et inacceptable.

La Charte de la langue française a fait plaisir les québécois tel qu'il soit un empêchement à la dominance de l'anglais au Québec. Le travail, l'état, le commerce, et toutes les institutions publiques ont été transformées et francisés très rapidement, et l'influence du français s'est répandu partout la province et à toutes les communautés, soient-ils anglophones, allophones, autochtones, et surtout francophones. La Charte a donné beaucoup aux francophones qui font une majorité puissante au Québec, il leur a donné les outils pour bâtir une société dans leur propre langue.

L'épanouissement du français au beau pays est une étape progressive vers la libération nationale, il faut que les langues des opprimés soient protégés et promu chez-eux, c'est une partie inaliénable de leur culture et leur vie. Mais la dominance du français au Québec sert une autre but, celui des capitalistes.

La primauté de la langue française au Québec doit être considéré d'un point de vu prolétaire. Qui est servi par la dominance du français, qui bénéfice vraiment de cette croissance du français au Québec? Elle est la bourgeoisie québécoise surtout, bien-sûr. Les capitalistes doivent avoir leur propre marché pour en distribuer leurs produits, et la dominance de leur langue et celle des consommateurs, soit, pour les exploiteurs, une chose très chouette. Il signifie que maintenant que la langue française domine la société, la bourgeoisie native peut prendre un rôle plus puissant dans le marché, l'économie, et la politique.

Ce n'est pas à dire qu'on ne soutient pas la primauté du français au Québec, étant la langue majoritaire. Mais le nationalisme qui le français évoque, les divisions linguistiques qui sont renforcées par tels lois, ne sont que réactionnaires. Les québécoises du tout sorte doivent regarder au delà des divisions linguistiques et voir les choses similaires que tous les travailleurs du Canada, et le monde, partagent: l'oppression des capitalistes.

Canada to Harper: «Show me the money!»

2009-05-10T10:04:00.000-04:00

In the midst of the most severe economic crisis for generations, in the face of rising unemployment, homelessness, poverty, and insecurity, the Harper administration is playing political games with our money. In January, the Conservative government promised Canada a massive investment in the country's crumbling infrastructure (parlons pas des autoroutes québécoises!) which was meant to improve lives and provide jobs when the nation needs it the most.

Yet somehow, the flow of federal money being poured out on roads, trains, etc. has yet to actually materialise. We were promised 4 billion dollars, and yet almost none of it has been seen. The Transport Minister claims that the government is working «10 times faster» than normal in order to get the dollars circulating, but somehow, 5 months after the announcment for funding, only 2 projects have seen actual cheques from the government.

Does anyone know why the government is acting so slow to implement its policies? Were I Prime Minister, I would want to be seen to be doing everything possible to create jobs and aleviate the suffering that the crisis causes, and infrastructure investment is a basic tenet of capitalist reformism in these times. This isn't happening, for whatever reason.

Québec Liberals under fire over investment funds

2009-05-08T11:15:00.001-04:00

The Liberal Party of Québec has demonstrated again, in a seemingly unending string of compromising incidents, in the face of an unrelenting economic crisis, that it, among the other major parties in the National Assembly, is inept to lead the country. Jean Charest's Liberals have let their ethics run wild at the expense of their credibility in the eyes of the québécoise nation. And through it all, the Québécois Liberals have continued to remain muted on the issues raised, instead resorting to the use of the Chambers of Commerce Federation of Québec to defend them and their disgraced investment scheme, FIER (Regional Economic Intervention Funds).

The issue at the heart of matter is the administration of the FIER funds and their actual capacity to cause economic regeneration in their specified areas. It seems that several of the Liberal Party's closest friends have made generous use of the Québec governments promise to match each dollar invested with a further 2.50$, up to 10M$. It has been revealed that two businessmen, Pietro Perrino and Valier Boivin, have together administered nearly 10 different companies who benefited from the scheme. Even more shocking is the admittance that many of these funds, including in the Estrie where this figure stands at 70%, go outside of their designated region, often to Montréal or other areas of more lucrative development, and some even go out of Québec!

The adéquiste and péquiste deputies have had a field day with these discrepencies in the program, attacking the government over their ineptness to administer these funds properly, and furthermore to respond to the string of allegations regarding their ethical etiquette, after the signing of a contract by former Health Minister Philip Couillard with an health investment fund just after his resignation, along with further allegations of favouratism and lobbying among the PLQ. Only time will tell what the future is for the Liberal party of Québec and its governing administration...

Québec Solidaire veut dépasser le capitalisme?

2009-05-07T11:09:00.002-04:00

Sur la fête internationale de travailleurs, Québec Solidaire a dévoilé son nouveau manifeste, titré «Pour sortir de la crise: Dépasser le capitalisme?», mais il n'est pas progressif de la façon dont le titre parait. Contenu dans le manifeste il y a beaucoup de propositions et beaux sentiments, phrases doux qui essaient de critiquer le capitalisme et ses effets, mais en fait le manifeste ne dépassent rien. Il parle de chercher un système alternatif, mais ne propose pas changements fondamentaux pour la société.

La crise du capitalisme est un signe de la nature passée du système, la bourgeoisie n'est qu'une entrave sur le progrès humain. L'impérialisme est rampant, la pauvreté accroît chaque jour pendant que milliers d'enfants meurent chaque nuit à cause de la faim et les maladies évitables. La preuve est claire pour voir, si les yeux sont ouverts.

Les capitalistes exproprient la richesse produite par la classe ouvrière, et nous donnent juste assez pour nous soutenir. Le reste est son propre pour investir, spéculer et s'enrichir. La bien-être de la race humaine est robée par la bourgeoisie internationale. Ils suit dans ce chemin seulement avec l'appui, consciemment ou non, de la classe ouvrière. Prenons-nous le pouvoir, et réglons-nous les problèmes qui ravagent l'humanité!

Québec Solidaire a critiqué le système, mais il est bel nécessaire qu'il propose un alternatif concrète, et c'est le socialisme. La planification démocratique de l'économie, une démocratie des travailleurs, l'unification des forces de la production pour la bien-être de toute l'humanité, c'est le seul chemin pour suivre. Le capitalisme n'offre rien que l'oppression et la pauvreté, ce sont les faits. Prenons-nous le pouvoir à nous diriger vers un futur plus brillant!

Liberals play to the working class, the Conservatives just won't...

2009-05-05T11:32:00.000-04:00

Newly crowned leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, in the face of the worsening economic crisis, has called on the government to reduce the threshold for unemployment benefits for Canadian workers and their families. The Conservatives have whole-heartedly rejected this proposal, which aims to decrease the number of hours worked in order to qualify, as well as putting that figure at a common national level.

The proposal asks for a lower threshold of 360 hours worked to be able to qualify for employment insurance, for all regions of Canada, as opposed to the current system which sets the limit between 420-700 hours depending on the unemployment rate of the particular area . This call reflects the growing number of demands for EI, up 20% by some accounts, as well as an increasing trend among employers to cut workers hours.

The Conservative rejection is simply a reaffirmation of their values. They don't even pretend to care about workers and their families, let alone those worst hit by the economic crisis that they and their capitalist friends have helped create. The Conservative government is already dealing with a debt level not seen for years in Canada, they can hardly afford to make concessions to the masses when they have banks to save and a financial system to prop up!

The Bumbling Gordon Brown

2009-05-04T10:38:00.000-04:00

Just weeks after his triumphant return from the G-20 summit on the economic crisis, having successfully led the team of leaders to a capitalist compromise on how to deal with the recession, Gordon Brown has been humiliated both at home and abroad, by those close to him, as well as his most staunch enemies.

The Labour Minister for Communities Hazel Blears has publicly attacked the government for their conduct, though still affirming that the Prime Minister is the right man for the job. Others have been far more critical of Superman Brown, including a large number of backbenchers who have completely defied the Labour whip by voting for a Liberal Democrat bill which would allow for the freer settlement of the Gurkha (Nepalese soldiers fighting for the Crown) in the United Kingdom. And by the end of the week all hopes for a settlement over the huge issue of MPs expenses was all but torn asunder by the Opposition and the Labour backbenches.

And that is just the home front. Brown recently received a tongue-lashing from the Polish Prime Minister on economics, as well as being stood up at a high level press conference with Pakistani President Zardari. This coming after the rousing speech made against Brown's fiscal policy in the European Parliament by the British Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan, the video of which soon became viral, making its way around the world.

As if this were not enough, former Home Secretary for the Labour government Charles Clarke has openly declared that recent cock-ups by the government make him «ashamed» to be a Labour MP. There is talk of replacing Brown with his Health Secretary Alan Johnson. This not to mention the possible defection of 12 Labour MPs to the Liberal Democrats, should the government lose their confidence with further incompetence.

Current polls give the Tories a 100 plus seat lead in the Mother of All Parliaments should the election be held tomorrow (note that Brown has just about 12 months to call a general election). The upcoming European Elections will largely be a referendum on the state of UK politics at the present time, rather than anything to do with the EU and its management. Should Brown suffer an even more humiliating defeat at this time, he will have no choice but to step down...or be pushed.

Un autre chemin pour le Québec, vers une vrai indépendance

2009-05-03T19:55:00.000-04:00

L’histoire du Québec en est une d’oppression nationale et économique. Québec s’est occupé depuis la Révolution tranquille avec deux grandes luttes historiques: la bataille des classe et celle pour la libération nationale.

Le Québec est une société fragmentée, mais pas dans le sens qui est normalement revendu par les nationalistes ou fédéralistes doux. Le Québec est un pays divisé entre les capitalistes et leurs extensions dans la forme du gouvernement, soit-il libéral ou péquiste et les travailleurs québécois, sans égard de leur origine, qui produisent la richesse du pays.

Le rêve d’un Québec libre reste encore dans l’esprit des indépendantistes qui compte sur le nationalisme pour régler les problèmes de la nation: le chômage, la pauvreté, le manque de logements abordables, l’exclusion sociale, les services sociaux et de santé, etc. Mais le fait est que ces problèmes sont ceux du capitalisme et n’ont rien à voir avec la Confédération canadienne. Rompre avec le reste du Canada dans un contexte capitaliste est invraisemblable, car cela ne changerait rien à la base de cette société, c’est-à-dire l’économie.

Le Québec a beaucoup souffert pendant son histoire aux mains d’exploiteurs étrangers, mais on doit se souvenir que la Nouvelle-France a exploité les habitants canadiens avant la conquête et a donné rapidement ses compatriotes aux Britanniques pour mieux les oppresser. 200 ans depuis cet évènement, sous l’ombre de la Révolution tranquille, une nouvelle classe d’exploiteurs est revenue au Québec: le bourgeois et le petit bourgeois québécois. Ils sont les mêmes bêtes féroces, mais avec un rugissement français…

La nouvelle classe capitaliste québécoise, depuis les grandes émeutes de la révolution québécoise de 1972, a réussi à réclamer la lutte contre l’oppression économique pour une lutte contre l’oppression nationale. Rien ne pourrait servir mieux leurs intérêts. Après une décennie de concessions de la classe ouvrière, les capitalistes québécois en ont eu marre de la lutte des classes, et sont retournés à une situation plus normale.

Donc, le PQ s’est transformé d’un parti purement nationaliste vers un parti qui essaie de compter sur la gauche québécoise pour prétendre qu’ils se sont occupés des problèmes quotidiens des travailleurs. Le rêve pour une société équitable a été fusé avec la lutte pour un pays indépendant.

Presque 40 ans plus tard, le PQ domine toujours la gauche québécoise, corrompt la lutte des classes pour un «nationalisme progressiste». Cela veut dire un projet indépendantiste qui se comporte comme un parti de gauche quand en fait il ne représente rien d’autre qu’une continuation de la même exploitation de la classe ouvrière.

En réalité le Québec ne pourra jamais être indépendant dans un contexte capitaliste, il sera toujours dépendant des impérialistes étrangers. Le Québec ne sera libre que lorsqu’il se libérera des chaînes du capitalisme.

Beyond nationalism: A true independence for Québec

2009-05-03T11:52:00.001-04:00

The history of Québec is one of national oppression and subjugation of the working class to the interests of the British, then Canadian, and finally Québécois exploiting classes. The two narratives have often subverted one another, as the pendulum swings from ferocious class war to an equally ferocious struggle for national liberation, eventually settling somewhere in the middle. The important thing to remember is that the two are inextricably linked.

The future of Québec, independent, sovereign, and radiant, depends not on the breaking of the bonds of the Confederation, but on the destruction of the chains of exploitation. It is a simplistic overstatement to claim that the fight for an independent Québec must come first and foremost in the minds and souls of the Québécois people, for an independent Québec in a capitalist context simply means an even deeper exploitation of the Québécois by the native bourgeois as well as the foreign imperialists.

If Québec is now a semi-colony of Canada, it's independence would most certainly mean the subordination of the nation to the interests and whims not only of the anglophone Canadian bourgeois, but even more so to the American companies and bosses. Québec would be ripe for exploitation by the larger imperialist nations of the world, and it would soon find that for all the talk of «Maîtres chez-nous» they will be just as oppressed as before. And let us take note as well that this is a globalised economy, the national bourgeois of Québec are tied by a thousand strings to their Canadian, American, and international counterparts. They can play no independent role, and they are the ones who would be leading this new Québécois paradise.

Apart from the threat of further foreign domination, the Québécois would be right to fear their home grown tycoons and corporations, who have nothing more than profit as their highest concern. Without the generous contributions of the Canadian taxpayers, the Québécois state would be forced to shoulder the burden of services and finance squarely on the shoulders of the workers.

Donc, vivre, vivre, VIVRE, le Québec libre...libéré du capitalisme!

Liberals stopped dead in their tracks by Ignatieff?

2009-05-02T12:06:00.000-04:00

La Presse reports today that the Liberal Party of Canada seems to have stopped their climb in popularity on a national level (Québec not included apparently) due to the musings of the soon to be crowned leader of the party M. Michael Ignatieff MP. The issue seems to be tax increases to help offset the federal budget deficit, after the crisis runs its course.

M. Ignatieff was simply being realistic. The Liberal Party is a whole-hearted supporter of capitalism, and capitalism can't bear such extreme financial mismanagement as is reflected in the budget deficit. They want fiscal responsibility, and Ignatieff was simply reaffirming that his party is one which holds in high importance.

Tax hikes scare everyone, and should of course only be fairly distributed onto the shoulders of Corporate Canada, and not be made the burden of the Canadian workers. The Liberal Party of Canada needs to take a page out of the book of the National Democratic Party and start going after the companies of the country, although this seems to have done little to actually advance their chances in the last election.

An even more unlikely coalition...

2009-04-30T11:30:00.000-04:00

The Québécois political scene was recently very nearly turned on its head as it is revealed that before the electoral campaign of this past Autumn, up to the 8 December elections, the right-leaning autonomist Action Démocratique du Québec asked the Parti Québécois to reverse the government and take control in a coalition of shared power, to lead Québec through the economic crisis, with PQ leader Pauline Marois at the head of government.

Various senior sources have confirmed this unofficial and non-documented power play by the ADQ and Mario Dumont, and it has been denied by none, which makes one less likely to doubt its truthfulness. It does shed light on the minds of the adéquistes in the run-up to the election, they obviously knew how badly they would be defeated and needed to shore up support by any means necessary. This meant subjecting its political ideas of middle-class populist autonomist rhetoric to the nationalist populism of the Parti Québécois and Pauline Marois.

If anything demonstrated the basic sameness and inseparability of the current political formations of Québec, this does, with the exception Québec Solidaire, which is still in its formative stages and whose real position in Québec's national politics is still being decided. That the ADQ could bring itself to ask to become a junior partner in a coalition government while at the time (before the elections) the ADQ was the official opposition, (and not the Parti Québécois which was relegated to third-party, non-official status in the National Assembly) shows just how far the ADQ has fallen from its meteoric rise a few years ago...

The Liberal Party rises again in Québec

2009-04-29T09:36:00.000-04:00

The Liberal Party of Québec, as well as the Liberal Party of Canada, have made significant gains in la belle province recently, although it is difficult to understand exactly what that means. The Liberal Party on both levels of government is generally left-leaning, but then again so are the nationalist parties, at times...

The ways in which the Québécois electorate sways between nationalism and federalism is still a mystery to many, however there are plenty of different factors to be taken into consideration, as well as the constant fact that support for the Bloc Québécois or the Parti Québécois does not necessarily mean a firm support for the independence of Québec but rather a certain attraction at a given time to these parties political image and pondering, as well as their platform.

On the Federal level, for the first time in five years, the Liberal Party is ahead of the Bloc Québécois by 6 points at 37%, compared with a dismal 15% of the voting intentions for the Conservatives. The Bloc Québécois is probably suffering so badly to to the renewed energy and optimism in the party after the unofficial crowning of Michael Ignatieff in December. This really shows the incompetence and bad publicity that became Stéphane Dion after the October elections. Even among Francophones only, the Liberal Party is close to edging out the Bloc Québécois as the party of preference.

Provincially, the Liberal Party of Jean Charest is recovering from the scandalous winter of 2008-09, with the revelations of lobbying for the private sector by his former Health Minister, the mismanagement of CHUM, and a general decline in the level of competence of the Charest government in the face of the spiralling economic crisis in the country. The ways in which the Québec electorate moves, however it is safe to say that after a while, all people become discontent with discontent and will eventually follow their conservative conciousness which leads them to give another chance to those that have failed them so many times before.

As for the effects of this bounce in popularity for the Liberal parties in Québec, well, on va voir, on va voir...

Isreali Government confirms its opposition to a two state solution

2009-04-02T12:28:00.000-04:00

The new right-wing Israeli government has signalled its opposition, nay, nullification, of the Annapolis Agreement of 2007 which committed the Israeli and Palestinian governments to a peaceful two state solution. This was of course the logical step in the Netanyahu (again...) government's affirmation of its new political power, and is of course a play to their Israeli nationalist base.

Concerning the rights of Palestinians to self-determination, M. Netanyahu is quoted as saying:

«Under the final accord, the Palestinians will have all the rights to govern themselves except those that can put in danger the security and existence of the state of Israel» Al Jazeera, 31.3.09

A fairly meaningless comment from a fairly serious man. Basically it means that until Palestinians willingly accept the political and economic dominance of the Israeli state, they will have to endure the suppression. This paradigm has been the unspoken dominant player in Israeli government policy, until the revolt of the Palestinians stop, they are not to be allowed the measure of self-governance that would normally be allowed under other circumstances.

This isn't a matter of racism. The Israeli capitalist class, which supports the government in whatever left-leaning or right-weaning slant it takes on, depends upon the subjugation of the Palestinian, and Israeli working classes. Their separation is an division give only more strength to the exploiters on both sides of the ethno-religious dividing line, but up by the capitalists themselves.

It is for this reason and this reason alone, the undeniable relatedness of the Israeli and Palestinian people, their already well-intertwined destiny, which makes a two-state solution impossible. No amount of peace accords and negotiations will wipe clean the generations of religious and nationalist propaganda from both the Palestinian and Israeli ruling classes, the claims of superiority, of «rights», of vengeance, of heritage. The wounds are deep on both sides, and sometimes it's more complicated than it seems.

In order to overcome the solidarity of the Palestinian and Israeli workers against their exploiters is paramount. A revolt against the oppressors must take place on both sides, and unifying act of class conciousness which would be thought by many impossible. The recent occupation activity in Belfast shows the emptiness of this claim, with Nationalist and Unionist workers taking action against their employers merciless policies.

Only when the yoke of oppression is cast off throughout the lands of Israel and Palestine, when the population realise a clear and utter unity against capitalist and feudal exploitation, can true peace be realised. And when that time comes, there will be no need for a two-state solution, for there will be workers democracy in control and peaceful and voluntary federation of Arab and Jewish people, for their mutual peace and prosperity.

Brazilian President is openly racist

2009-03-30T12:14:00.001-04:00

«This crisis was caused by people with black people and brown eyes»

Can you imagine a more abominable statement to come from a head of state? Well imagine it because the Brazilian president Lula da Silva said exactly that except in place of «black hair and black skin» he said «This crisis was caused by white people with blue eyes». This is frankly insulting and racist to the hundreds of millions of Caucasian workers around the world who stand in solidarity with their brothers and sisters of all colours.

The Brazilian president may have had some good intentions behind his statement, but he would get a bit more credibility if he were to tell the truth: that this is a crisis of international capital, caused by a fall in the rate of profit, perpetuated by the auxiliary factors of a credit crunch, toxic assets, and a housing bubble (the later mainly being in the sphere of the Anglo-Saxon world).

It is a crisis of the capitalist oppressors, a natural part of the cycle of boom and bust which sees profits rise and fall as other factors play into their accumulation of wealth. To blame it on a certain type of people, even a certain sector of the economy (such as the finance industry) is pure stupidity.

On the subject of Brazil let us chastise M. da Silva not only for his racism, but for his open collaboration with the capitalist exploiters, both Brazilian and International. He is a Labour Party president and should be fighting for the rights of the people, not the interests of the bourgeoisie. For a return to socialist principles in the Partido dos Trabalhadores!

Immigration Loophole through Québec!

2009-03-29T17:18:00.001-04:00

The new rules concerning applications for skilled workers to settle in Canada have caused quite a stir, but has not apparently put off the flow of immigrants into Canada. In the face of an economic downturn many might support tighter immigration controls, however it is now more than ever that Canada needs young talented people to support its rapidly ageing population.

The rules are as such: Any application made will not be considered unless the applicant has secured a job offer from a Canadian employer, or if your skilled trade is on the list of shortage occupations provided by the CIC in collaboration with HRSDC and the trade unions. This means that anyone who has not secured a job offer and is not a professional in one of the listed trades, they will not be allowed to settle in Canada (sorry to reiterate).

But there is a clause to this, and this clause is that the new rules do not apply to Québec, which selects its immigrants independently, and simply gets a rubber-stamp from CIC for its chosen candidates. That means that if one qualifies under the Canadian immigration points system, but would not have their application treated because of the new rules, they can apply to immigrate to Québec, (the requirements are pretty much the same)and once they get their permanent residence status can move anywhere in Canada!

Update (25.7.10) The Québec government's current immigration policy does now require you to hold a valid job offer or have training in one of the preferred areas.

Why Labour is the future for Britain

2009-03-29T12:05:00.002-04:00

The masses always move through their traditional organisations, mainly the trade unions and the parties built upon that movement, the Labour and Social-Democratic parties of the world. This will remain true no matter how distant and deranged the leadership becomes, the working class will eventually always take back its rightful place in its movement, and the bureaucrats and politicians will have no choice but to go acquiesce, if only to save their own skin!

The Labour Party of the United Kingdom has changed unrecognisably since the days of MacDonald, Attlee and Wilson, the days of working class struggles and a party based on the founding of a truly equitable and prosperous society has all but disappeared, in its place a race to the bottom for greed and political gain. The battles once thought long won are being re-fought all over and the Labour government is leading the charge...against the workers.

The Labour Party of today is a pro-business, Keynesian caricature of its former self. Where as once the backbenchers of the Labour ranks could be proud of fighting for a better future for the country, they now must suffice with providing a better future for the bankers. The ideological gap between the Conservatives and Labour has never felt so tight, as they compete to out-manoeuvre the other in who can rescue the economy best, always at the tax payers expense and always to their detriment.

In social policy they are not much farther apart. Both Labour and Conservatives support the attacks on civil rights that have become a normal part of existence in Britain, they equally support the attacks on those on incapacity benefit and those out of work. Neither offers any way out to for the education débâcle, and the Minister and Shadow ministers for Immigration seem to be competing to see who can be most xenophobic and scaremongering in their rhetoric.

And yet for all of its faults, Labour remains based on the trade unions for its very existence, and that in itself shows enormous potential for change in the future. The trade unions, their members, perhaps even their leadership, will become more and more militant as the austerity measures of the coming period are unleashed upon the working class. The trade unions, along with militant party members, will in turn influence Labour Party policy and decisions, and we may see, on a day not so soon from now, that the famed Clause IV* is reinstated and Labour is again a party worth its name.

*Clause IV: Just to be reiterate:

«To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.»

Ignatieff gains in polls, Harper plummets

2009-03-28T16:21:00.000-04:00

Good news for M. Michael Ignatieff, the leader of the Canadian Liberal Party, in that he is slightly more well liked than his Conservative counter-part Prime Minister Stephen Harper. And while Harper faces a near 50% disapproval rating, the Liberal chieftain has made significant strides in his popularity. There is something to be said for the particular unpopularity of the Canadian Prime Minister. In the Conservative stronghold of Québec, where in the October elections he swept the province, Harper's disapproval rating is at 60% (compared to Alberta where of course it is 17%).

The hallmark of the Harper response to the economic crisis has been above all moderation. Perhaps Canadian workers are sick of M. Flaherty standing up and reassuring them of Canada's economic viability even while they see their living standards fall and funding for public services ever-strained. Canadians can see that no amount of infrastructure investment, EI contribution and tax freezes, no amount of the attempted easing of credit, will shield them from the effects of recession. The government held its consultation and it did not listen. The Government has spoken and now the country will not listen!

Needless to say in a recession most national leaders (Prime Ministers, Presidents, Chancellors, etc.) will suffer a wave of hatred as ordinary workers suffer for the calamities of the Capitalist system, but let M. Harper beware all the same...

The Healthcare Canadians Deserve!

2009-03-28T12:19:00.000-04:00

The Chief Doctor of the Canadian Medical Association, Robert Ouellet MD, has decried the state of existence of the Canadian healthcare system, specifically waiting times and funding, as well as the preferential treatment received by some of its patients, those with personal connections. He claims that the industrialised world's healthcare system has overall seemed to improve in the past few years, noting Britain, France and the Netherlands as specific examples, while Canada's 13 different healthcare system seems to be rotting.

The Canadian working class has fought hard for the gains of the universal healthcare system, and has from the beginning been a top priority for every Canadian. However there is a lack of political pressure, according to Dr. Ouellet, which is lacking in Canada that is demonstrated elsewhere. There is concerted political effort in most countries to develop and improve the efficiency, service and overall quality of the national healthcare systems. However that is not the case in Canada, perhaps owing to the balkanised nature of its administration.

The Canadian working class ought to rally around the banner of truly equitable and worthy universal healthcare, defend its rights to fair access and decent treatment.

Obama: Afghanistan foremost, Pakistan next, Imperialism always

2009-03-27T13:49:00.001-04:00

American President Obama has finally truly and boldly turned his eyes to Pakistan. In a press conference concerning his approach to Afghanistan, terrorism and the Taliban, he has outlined several key measures which he believes will bring success to the American mission in Afghanistan, however he has places significant attention on neighbouring Pakistan, he believes stability there will mean increased peace in the region. His goals for the region are:

Afghanistan:

17 000 extra troops in Afghanistan for the presidential elections
Increase and train Afghan security forces (4 000 U.S. instructors)
American-Afghan partner units for all troupes
Meet the statistical goal of a native Afghan Army of 134 000 and 80 000 strong police force by 2011
Agricultural engineer and other economic engineers to support the legal economy
Reconciliation tribunals

Pakistan:
(Along with continued military support and incursions)

1.5 billion dollars every year in donations to Pakistan from the United States government,
A border-fund which will help serve to develop the area economically and socially in favour of Western Democracy

M. Obama is attempting to make a pact with the American people: You give me the leeway to be the Imperialist that I want, and I will keep you safe. Of course that is not the case. The Taliban is a world-wide terrorist-guerilla movement, with certain areas having a higher influence than others, such as Afghanistan and Pakistan, but with branches and supporters all over the world. No amount of military action can defeat the Taliban, they will continue to regroup and retrain, as they have an endless amount of recruits and benefactors, dissatisfied with American imperialism and the way in which it affects them in their locality.

The only way to discourage people from terrorism and supporting guerilla tactics is to provide them an economic and social escape from the oppression and poverty and social exclusion that they are feeling. Capitalism provides no way out for the Islamic world, nothing more than exploitation and humiliation, as it wreaks havoc for everyone on the planet.

Only the ideology of peace, prosperity, and international solidarity, that of revolutionary socialism, can solve the problems of the Earth. Only with the abolition of wage-slavery and feudalism once and for all can we be free of the scourges of war and terrorism.

Liberals suffer a massive fall in popularity in Québec

2009-03-26T12:26:00.000-04:00

The Liberal Premier of Québec M. Jean (John) Charest , has seen his popularity plummet amid recent handling of the Caisse de Dépôts and the economy in general, not to mention the troubling news concerning the transition to private work of former Health Minister Philip Couillard. Let us remember that M. Charest fought an electoral platform based on being best-able to lead the country through the recession «The Economy First and Foremost. Yes!», indeed...

M. Charest has made a number of initiatives in order to help the workers of Québec, or at least shield them from the effects of the economic decline. The government has promised to make workers the utmost priority in its next budget (although with a projected deficit of between 3 and 5 billion dollars, some of which the PQ claims is due to mismanagement of Québec-Canada relations, which has supposedly let 6 billion dollars slide). It has promised to fund in-vitro fertilisation, along with huge tax credits for child-care. It has declared Québec «A Paradise for Families».

Despite all this, the government currently has a 37 pc approval rating, compared to the mid 50's a few months ago. Their share of the vote today would be 33 pc, while the Parti Québécois would gain 40 pc. The real shocker is that Québec Solidaire has 8 pc, double its December poll ratings and nearly edging out the Adéquistes with 10 pc!

The entire political climate in Québec seems to be shifting to the left, whether it be the Liberals and their worker-oriented policies, or the rise of Québec Solidaire, there is a ferment among the workers that will sooner or later be expressed in the polls, and on the streets!

What a Labour defeat would mean

2009-03-25T12:00:00.000-04:00

The Labour Party could be embarking upon a major period of change if it suffers an electoral defeat. This was brought to my attention by a comrade who believes that Labour will feel a massive shift to the left once in Opposition, and hearing that argument one must tend to agree. One always feared what a Labour loss would mean for the country, let alone the party, but this hypothesis, which is new to me, sound promising.

If Labour is defeated in the next election, it could mean a broad push towards socialism and the ideas upon which it was founded. One could even hope for the return of Clause IV! But let us not get ahead of ourselves. We must look at the present situation in a sober manner and assess the prospects ahead:

The Labour back benches are already clamouring towards opposition to NuLabour and its policies, whether it be the row over the 10p rate, the Post Office, etc. Whether these politicians are defending what they believe in or simply want to keep their seats is debatable. But that the Back Benchers are defying the whips, going off on their own and allowing themselves to be pushed by their constituents to the left is a promising sign.
The masses are moving: Protests over Gaza, massive solidarity campaign, led from below with the Lindsey refinery workers shows that the people are ready for action.
A Conservative government will be forced to make serious cuts in public spending, and has already said so. That will means cuts in services, the NHS, employment programs when they are most needed, etc. Severe austerity is on the order of the day, and the workers will not tolerate it.

What will a Conservative Government mean for Immigration in the UK

2009-03-25T10:48:00.001-04:00

(Cross-posted from Student Immigration Blog)

The way in which David Cameron has approached the subject of immigration has been very careful. He leaves his shadow ministers to do most of the dirty work, only really commenting on the «issue» when there is something so outrageous to the British public that he must (such as several thousand illegal immigrants working for the security services). However that is not to say that the Conservatives don't have a comprehensive scaremongering platform for Immigration.

Their main gripe: Population growth. The population is of the Great Britain is expected to reach 70 million within the next 20 years, something that strikes fear into the heart of Middle England. It is estimated that there will soon be more pensioners than workers, meaning that the social services system will be under more pressure and that the country will become more crowded and more diverse.

None of these are problems however. An increase in immigration will mean able-bodied qualified young men and women will come and support the ageing population through their tax contributions and the services they provide in Health, Education, civil authorities, etc. Diversity is a non-starter, already 1 in 10 children in Britain are mixed race, not to mention the UK being comprised of 4 distinct national groups along with many other strong minority communities. And crowding, well let us remember that there is a huge amount of empty land in the UK which is neither protected nor build on.

And lets not blame Conservatives alone for this fear-invoking prediction, NuLabour Immigration Minister has pledged to not let this happen!

Québec and Canada: Pas de contradiction

2009-03-24T13:17:00.002-04:00

M. Ignatieff, leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, has given a rousing speech in front of several hundred activists claiming that there is no exclusivity in an affinity towards Québec and another towards Canada. He claims that unlike the Bloc's perennial argument about the necessity for a distinct Québécois opposition in Parliament, Ignatieff believes that the Québécois deserve, neigh must, be included in government.

So how different are the Québécois from the Canadians, and what do they have to offer each other? I would say that Québec's advantage is that it is a lot more socially concious and politically active than those in the rest of the country. Canada can offer a multicultural tradition of unity and a history of co-operation and negotiations. Together they make for an interesting balance of forces in the country, but it should be remembered always that the workers of North America are not divided by state, provincial, nor national lines, but by their capitalist oppressors. None of us are all that different after all...

If you get a change hit up the Student Immigration Blog

Québec Liberals: Don't worry, we can get out of this

2009-03-20T13:50:00.000-04:00

Prime Minister Charest has made a unique set of promises to the people of Québec, in a Liberal manner, however dressed up in the language of the Left. The Premier claims to be able to secure a similar level of services to the population as a whole, while giving much needed help to the working poor and unemployed, despite the looming recession and the first budget deficit in his tenure.

Liberals are famous for trying to reconcile the crises of capitalism with the needs and desires of the working class. Despite the desperate need by the capitalist class for austerity, there are some stead-fast Liberals who remain committed to holding onto power and allegiance among the working class. This is, I believe, a step forward for the party in Québec, in that it can show that it is not only concerned with the bankers and businessmen, but the regular men and women of Québec.

That's not to say that Capital and its survival is not their main concern. They are focusing a good part of their initiative on the small to medium term enterprises. These companies are struggling, however it is their employees, the workers of Québec, which deserve the most help, not the business and financial sector. Many would argue that small business and the finance sector keep people in employment. I have a one phrase answer to that rebuke: Nationalisation under workers democratic control.

If you get a moment check out my latest post at the Student Immigration Blog

Spend your money elsewhere: Capitalism offers no hope for Africa

2009-03-17T12:59:00.000-04:00

Even the most bourgeois of Africa's leaders are recognising that the economic downturn will affect the lives of the great number of people to which the continent plays home to. The capitalist system, with its loans, investments, pillaging, and plundering, has already kept Africa decades behind the West in terms of development, in all areas that matter: Access to water, child-death rates, life expectancy, hunger, constant warfare, etc. are all a damning testament to what exactly capitalism has to offer to the developing world. After 50 years of independence and native capitalism, Imperialism and foreign domination remains, as it always will under the rule of Capital.

The capitalists and their henchmen the local politicians, can't help but beg for more money to be poured into the continent, claiming that every dollar spent in Africa has an exponential effect on regeneration of not only the African continent, but the World's financial well-being. This is pure and utter nonsense. Extra spending, liquidity, quantitative easing, all these mechanisms can but just stave off further wreckage.

The only way for the capitalist crisis to be solved is through socialism. There is no other group of people offering any way out of this mess. And as Marx becomes ever more popular once again in the West, the people of the developing world are also turning to the revolutionary ideas which are their inheritance as workers, and will arise with a new strength, and forge a world worthy of the human race.

For those of you who are more proactive, I suggest reading Trotsky's «Results and Prospects» as well as donating to SOS Children, an orphan agency which does extensive work with AIDS orphans in Africa.

New Student Immigrant Blog

2009-03-17T12:08:00.000-04:00

In an effort to help better understand myself, and make it clearer for others in the process, I have started a blog documenting my immigration process to the United Kingdom. So please, check my new blog, « Student Immigration Blog: To the UK!», please and thank you!

How the capitalists divide the working class

2009-03-17T08:33:00.001-04:00

There have been many different groups which have come to make up the demographic make-up of the Canada. The working class of Canada is a multicultural, multiracial, heterogeneous group. Any divisions between the proletariat is simply that which has been invented by the capitalists lords and rulers.

Despite the most desperate attempts to combat their own self-made monster (racism, sexism, etc.) the ruling class continues in the exploitation nonetheless of the most vulnerable people in society. regardless of the legislation that the bourgeois representatives put in place.

What must be understood is that the ruling class depends on pitting worker against worker, to see who can sell their labour most effectively for the cheapest price. Our sweat and blood and pain and endurance is nothing more than a commodity to them, and the best way to extract that commodity is to create competition.

Competition in the labour market manifests itself in the competition for social services, and even into a wider sense of generalised racism among entire groups of people. It is easy to write off racism and sexism as an age-old problem which can never be stopped, regardless of how many laws and regulations are put in place. The truth is that the only way to put an end to these atrocities is to take the economy under democratic workers control, where all parts of society have a stake and a place in the running of the World.

Ignatieff goes soft on Coalition for Change

2008-12-30T12:31:00.000-05:00

M. Michael Ignatieff continues to sell-out Liberal principles of freedom and social justice by giving their tacit support to whatever scraps the Conservative party decides to throw at the Canadian people. The Liberal party is and deserves better. The Liberal-NDP coalition, supported by the Bloc Québécois, has the potential to lead Canada through the darkness that the oncoming recession promises to the working people of the nation, and that coalition is in peril, even if the Québécois Confédération de Syndicats nationaux doubts it.

The Conservative proposals in the past have been an appalling caricature of the what a country's government should be. The way in which the Tories have pushed forward their agenda of backwardness, reaction, and enrichment of the wealthy have put the other bourgeois parties, like the Bloc Québécois and the Liberal Party, to shame. The Governor General urges us to be «realistic», that is, accept whatever is given to us by the capitalists. The people of Canada want more, expect more, voted for more, and quite frankly no Conservative government is possible of delivering that to them.

The other parties in the coalition have been talking tough, and that is truly what is needed. The way in which the coalition conducts itself in the future will rest firmly on the moral authority of the New Democratic Party and its leader Jack Layton, lacking as he is in many areas. The Bloc Québécois is a progressive force for Canada, although it is mainly focused on Québec as is its remit. It is surprising that the Bloc Québécois realises its importance so fully

However the ball rests firmly in the court of the Liberal Party of Canada, and it must play the offensive position. The prize is the welfare of Canada's people. That must not be put at stake by a Liberal party leader who harbours illusions (disillusions)!

Ignatieff: «The coalition if necesary, but not necessarily the coalition»

2008-12-16T11:09:00.000-05:00

Yes the Liberals are fulfilling some of their detractors worse predictions by allowing the Harper government to dictate the terms of any possible agreement regarding the budget. On Friday, Ignatieff and the Prime Minister met to discuss the economy and the soon-to-be-unveiled plan for the coming year. Though both were very coy about the discussion, however things were clarified by the statements of Liberal spokesman Jean-François Del Torchio:

"The ball is in Mr. Harper's court...He needs to put forward a credible economic plan."

A credible economic plan? He can't be serious, can he? To expect the Conservative government to even pretend to make concessions to the working class in times of such crisis is pure self-deception. Hell, the Tories won't even show us the real state of government finance! The Harper administration has promised Canada a significant change in the way finances are handled, and nearly two-thirds of the population rejected his platform! The progressive forces in Parliament, though it has been pro-rouged, are a clear majority and must, must, must, make their presence and power felt.

M. Ignatieff has stated that he wants to wait for the Conservative government before he makes any decision on coalition formation. This passive move is a horrible vacillation, waiting for the Tories to make the first move is paramount to betrayal of his future partners in the coalition, as well as the Canadian people. It is incumbent upon all progressive liberals to try and influence the party in order that it may take the correct decisions and execute them well.

Ignatieff stands firm on Québec, vacilates on Coalition

2008-12-11T12:44:00.000-05:00

The Liberal Party of Canada, under the leadership of the newly knighted Michael Ignatieff, has declared itself the «federalist option» for Québec. This is a particularly boisterous statement considering the party's performance in the past 2 federal elections in the province. It is a statement which beggars belief considering that the Liberal party seems to be one of the least representative of Québécois values in comparison to the Bloc and the Conservatives. The question begs to be asked, why? Why does the Liberal party of Canada feel itself best placed to represent Canadian unity for the Québécois people?

In other news, PM Harper has swiftly responded to the crowning of Ignatieff by asking for a meeting to discuss the budget. M. Ignatieff has acquiesced and granted the Prime Minister a meeting, but made it clear that Harper must be willing to make changes in order to save his government. This is not a good sign, as it shows that the new Liberal leader thinks it possible to find compromise with the Conservative Prime Minister. Right now Liberals and Népédistes hold the power, but Ignatieff could easily give away the will of the 62% majority in exchange for political dealings, as has been done so many times before. Let's keep the Liberal party honest!

Capitalism in Practice: World Hunger rises towards a billion

2008-12-11T08:14:00.000-05:00

The number of people under-nourished or starving has increased to nearly 1 billion people world-wide, with an extra 40 million people added to the total in the past year. That means that approximately 15% of the world population is without food, a shocking statistic in the world of trillions of dollars worth of bailouts, money literally thrown at failing corporations. While world leaders rush around frantically trying to maintain stability and stave of further stagnation in the world economy, the sick and hungry don't seem to warrant the same attention as bankers and financial analysts.

There is no reason why there should be anyone going without food in a world of overproduction and wealth beyond belief. Workers more productive than thought possible, the means of production have been developed towards an extraordinary level. The scientific feats achieved in our times mean that no one has to go hungry. And yet the chaos and cruelty of the capitalist system perpetuates indefinitely the very crisis for which it has created the means to solve.

A new road must be taken, one of socialist production on a world scale, one where things are planned on a democratic basis according to the needs and ability of all. Capitalism has out-lived its productive stage and must be destroyed! Forward to the day when no one has to suffer any longer from the pain of hunger!

For more information see: What is really behind the food crisis?

Liberal Victory in Québec 2008: A Class Analysis

2008-12-10T12:39:00.001-05:00

The Liberal Party of Québec will form the next government of the country as a majority, barely. The key number was 63, the Libéraux elected 66 deputies to the National Assembly. In second place forming the official opposition is the Parti Québécois who beat the Action Démocratique du Québec by a comparative landslide. Another important development was the election of a deputy of the leftist Québec Solidaire leader Amir Khadir, the first in the party's history.

The victory of the Liberal Party is significant in that it is the third straight mandate for Jean Charest and the Libéraux, a feat unseen since the Union Nationale government of Duplessis in the mid-20th century. However by the end of that third term, the Québec population was thoroughly sick of the conservatism and repression of that government and swiftly registered their discontent by voting Liberal in huge numbers. Hopefully the same will not be said of M. Charest's third term.

The main priority for the government of the Liberal Party of Québec will be maintaining peace and stability during the economic downturn, and will most likely be forced to attack the working class on many occasions. The major themes, or platitudes we should say, contained in the election platform are:

Ensure demographic growth of Québec across all regions
Promote our territory and natural resources
Be more productive and innovative
Better prepare our children for the future
Improve the quality of our services
Reinforce our identity as an economic asset
[PLQ, Election Platform, p.3]

These are some pretty bourgeois promises if we look at them from a class perspective. Ensuring the demographic growth of Québec is a play to all the regions suffering from exodus into the cities and other provinces, where cheap (read youth/immigrant) labour is desperately needed in order to keep the economy moving. Promoting our territory and natural resources signifies opening up the North of Québec which remains greatly underdeveloped in terms of its capacity as a major source of precious materials. It also means propping up the ailing forest industry which should be nationalised considering the sensitivity and importance the sector plays in the québécois economy.

Being more productive and innovative means more efficiently exploiting the labour of the working class in order to produce more profit. No one can hide behind such a statement. The specific promises made may seem benevolent enough, however it is clear what is on the Charest agenda: further exploitation of the workers.

Educating our children is an important goal for society as a whole but especially for the ruling class. There is a significant risk of an underclass developing here, as in Britain, which has no vocational or post-secondary training, is out of work, and not feeling able to contribute to the economy. In order to prevent that the government must place the CÉGEPS and universities at the forefront of the agenda and grant free life-long education. Standards, test scores, and drop-out rates ought to be given priority in primary and secondary education, especially in the areas of French and maths.

Social and health services are a key concern for all Québécois. The majority of Québécois prize and value their social security system, but also yearn to improve it. The Régie has to at all costs be kept from privitisation at all costs. Waiting times and efficiency must be improved. Prescriptions must be made completely free. The administration has outlined a commitment to a further 15 000 places in the highly subsidised and affordable state child-care centres. However this is not enough, free childcare should be a right for working parents. The last theme is better not touched as it seems to be pure nationalist-lite posturing.

Priorities for the Coalition

2008-12-04T12:24:00.000-05:00

What the working class needs from Liberals and the NDP:

Jobs
Justice
Quality health services
National childcare
Free life-long education
A solution to the constitutional impasses
A clean environment
A strong economy, even if that means nationalisation of failing companies

Any LPC/NDP Coalition that could secure even one of these gains would be seen as a hero by the Canadian people. The measures are what the working class of Canada need and deserve. Until there is a genuinely wide-spread revolutionary movement in Canada, the transitional demands remain on the agenda, and of these, one has highlighted the most important.

Can anybody think of anything else?

Coalition:A suicide pact or a golden compromise?

2008-12-04T09:40:00.000-05:00

One has been largely silent regarding the fate of the Canadian Parliament. It looks as though Stephen Harper will be toppled by the very issue on which he campaigned, the economy. And so the question begs to be asked, «what next?». Should the Opposition MPs vote, as they have promised to, against the budget, that will force the Queen's Representative Mrs. Governor General Michaelle Jean to find a solution to the governmental crisis which would most likely involve a coalition of Liberals and Népedistes, with Bloquiste support forthcoming as seen necessary.

This situation has cause an uproar in Canadian politics and put us in a situation unthinkable even a month ago. The progressive left has toyed with the idea of a Liberal-NDP coalition, with partisans of both sides having a go at expressing themselves and their opinions. Many are against, many are for, and both have excellent reasons for wanting their option to be chosen (either let the government fall or form a coalition).

From a class-interest point of view, the New Democratic Party is the mass party of labour with its numerous ties to the trade unions, and is therefore most apt to represent the interests of the working class. However many left-leaning voters err towards the Liberals for whatever reason. Therefore it is my contention that the Liberals and the New Democrats are not at this point qualitatively different from the Liberals on the important issues such as the economy, Afghanistan, and other federal matters. There is no reason why these two parties can not work together.

Furthermore, it may well be in the interests of the working class to have their representative party in power, playing even a minimal role. It will give the NDP clout on the national stage, show people that they are ready for federal government, and hopefully, pushing the Liberals in a progressive direction. There are several key proposals in the NDP program worth considering by the Liberal Party of Canada such as nation wide-child care, 1 000 student grants, national prescription drug plan etc.

There is no reason why the New Democratic Party should not take part in the coalition that is currently being discussed, but there are many reasons why they should.

Pakistan retakes its sovereignty!

2008-10-27T11:03:00.002-04:00

Pakistan's National Assembly has said no to U.S. imperialism and the destruction wrought upon the country by it. The cross-party resolution passed unanimously in the legislature and has been hailed by many as the first real step towards an independent and rational defence policy for the country. From now on the government of Pakistan will be engaging in dialogue with Taliban and Taliban-affiliated groups in the border regions of the country instead of simply attacking them and thereby whipping up more anti-government sentiment among the people living in that region.

The United States has used to War on Terror as an excuse to intrude on Pakistan's sovereignty and forced therm to accept attacks on their own soil, often times killing civilians and provoking further terrorist attacks in the area. It is a long overdue step on the side of the Pakistani government, especially one so firmly under the control of what is supposed to be a party of «change», the Pakistan People's Party. In any case, the deed is done, and there will be a significant difference in the way Pakistan handles rebels:

"Dialogue must now be the highest priority, as a principal instrument of conflict management and resolution," said the resolution. "The military will be replaced as early as possible by civilian law enforcement agencies." It also said Pakistan would pursue "an independent foreign policy" and, in a pointed reference to US military incursions into Pakistani territory, proclaimed that "the nation stands united against any incursions and invasions of the homeland, and calls upon the government to deal with it effectively". [Guardian, 24.10.08]

War and Refugees: Congo, Bosnia, Sri Lanka, Sudan

2008-10-26T10:12:00.001-04:00

Over 200 000 people have been forced to flee from their homes in the war-torn region of Eastern Congo. Unfortunately war has been a reality for the Democratic Republic for most of its independence. One can only hope that some day the greed and corruption which are rampant in the country and fuel the war are someday swept away by the power of the working people and that the countries rich supplies of natural resources can be used to provide a basic human standard of living
European MEPs have been warned not to take their eyes off of Bosnia-Herzegovina for fear that the carved-up state in Eastern Europe may yet again erupt in to conflict if the current political situation does not change. The complicated nature of politics in the 4 million strong nation-state ( which is split into the Serbian Republic and the Bosnian-Croat Federation) sees Serbian Republic Prime Minister Milorad Dodik and President of Bosnia-Herzegovina (as a whole nation) Haris Silajdzic stoking the fires of ethnic nationalism which rose in popularity after the fall of Joseph Broz Tito in the late 1980's. The international community has been told not to act as complacently as in the past.
India's parliament has learned exactly where the government stands on refugees: they are unwanted. In response to a question by a Member, a government spokesman has confirmed that Tamil refugees will not be welcomed from across the Palk Strait to the shores of Tamil Nadu and that the responsibility is that of the Sri Linkan state.
About 14 000 further people have been added to the roughly 1 million so far displaced in the Western Sudanese region of Darfur since the beginning of 2003. Continued fighting between government forces, their proxy militias, and the native rebels is part of a long running dispute over land and resources, in a Sudan where policies favour the rich and the Arab over the poor and the Black Africans.

Action can be taken to help refugees, and it should be done as a means of short-term salvation for many. Please make a donation to the UN High Commission for Refugees which is active in most of the world's trouble spots and is over-all making a difference to those displaced by war and persecution.

If only the root causes of these conflicts, most of which are said to be «ethnic» in nature, could actually be dealt with. The reality of the situation is that all the above-mentioned conflicts are results of the economy and competing interests between capitalists which use ethnic and religious differences in order to raise armies to defend their economic stakes in an area or expand or secure them. The only way out of this situation is an economy owned and planned by the common people!

Québec Immigration: There simply aren't enough francophones...

2008-10-24T13:31:00.002-04:00

Québec Liberal Minister for Immigration and Cultural Communities Yolande James has made it clear that the province, which has considerable control over the selection of skilled workers to migrate there, will not require all immigrants coming to Québec to speak French as has been suggested by some, and will instead focus on cultivating and improving potential immigrants' knowledge of French. Mme James has apparently based this decision on the assumption that the world does not have enough skilled Francophones to fill the skill shortages in Québec in a time-appropriate manner.

Last autumn the question of reasonable accommodation raged in the province, and to many this was most clearly represented in the immigration process which welcomes tens of thousands of individuals each year to work in the province who do not in fact speak the province's only official language. Many argue that the place of French in Québécois society is put in danger by lax immigration policy.

Such worries are misplaced. The language of education for all immigrants children is by law French, the language of work will for most be French, and the imperative for having a good knowledge of the language is essential in order to practice a skilled trade or profession in the province, thus, any non-Francophone skilled worker coming to Québec will no doubt be forced by the labour market and not the state, to learn the French language.

Is Harper using Québec?

2008-10-23T13:13:00.000-04:00

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released a document titled «The Harper Record», a compilation of analysis and criticisms of the Conservative administration, from economics to criminal justice, this manifesto is a comprehensive critique of the Harper government. In her discussion about Québec and inter-provincial and Ottawa-provincial relationships, Barbara Cameron sheds some light on the administration's balancing act with regards to la belle province:

The effect of trying to contain the national status of the Québécois within a framework of provincial equality is to reinforce a decentralising dynamic at the centre of Canadian federalism. Despite the often kneejerk reaction in the ROC that «whatever Québec gets, we get», the political reality is that progress on social rights and a Canada-wide level requires ending the link between the recognition of Québec and the notion of provincial equality. [Cameron, September 2008]

In summary «all provinces are not created equally, therefore Québec should have certain rights and responsibilities not necessarily granted to others because of its special status as a nation». Her observation about the governments attempt to decentralise through the back-door by using Québec as a catalyst for this destruction of the federal governments role is very perceptive.

So is she right, is the province of Québec a special case, deserving «reasonable accommodation» that other provinces are not entitled to? And is the Federal government using Québec to push for a new paradigm in federal policies and politics?

Obama supporters: Slaves to political correctness, liberated from logic...

2008-10-21T10:36:00.000-04:00

Having occasion to speak to some of my American friends of colour, it is not surprising that almost all of them will be voting Obama for President. It's unfortunately not surprising to hear that the motivation for their voting for him is, for some, the colour of his skin.

People have openly admitted to me that they will tick the Democratic nominee this November «because he is Black». Others, Black and White, tout the «historical nature of his presidency», aka, he will be the first Black president of the United States. They don't seem to see the contradiction in terms, where they are voting for a person based on their beliefs in equality and civil rights, while simultaneously depriving another candidate (John McCain) their vote based on... the colour of his skin. 40 years on, and this is where America is at...

In other news...

An Obama supporter descended from American slaves has made the claim that John McCain's ancestors owned them, and surprise, will not be voting for him in this election. Though she has made it clear that people should let go of any hatred, I hope that anyone thinking like this University professor will make the logical leap of conciousness and withhold any support, financial or otherwise, from any West African nation, whose leaders are in many cases descended from the ethnic and tribal chieftains who traded her ancestors for guns and gold...

What Colin Powell's endorsement really means

2008-10-19T10:43:00.001-04:00

Today on the American Meet the Press, former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Barak Obama for the Presidency of the United States. Some will say that it is a triumph for Barak Obama, gaining the support of a key figure in the first Bush administration (2000-2004), and will attempt to analyse the motives for him doing so.

But the reality of the situation is that this endorsement simply proves what some have known all along: that there is no difference between Barak Obama and John McCain, or even George Bush for that matter. They are all slaves to capitalism, proponents of a «free» market which has ravaged the world. The United States of America has no choice in this election.

Even looking at it from a «democratic» point of view, this is not a defeat for the Republicans, however how could any so-called «Democrat» cheer at the endorsement of their candidate by such a stalwart of the «right-wing» Bush Administration. The logical conclusion for any Democrat should be that their candidate is appealing to the Bush clique, and if that is so, then they should be disgusted, shouldn't they.

What will another minority governmnent mean? The Liberal Party will decide...

2008-10-09T13:52:00.000-04:00

The Liberal Party of Canada has made significant gains at the expense of the Conservatives (that would be Canadians «voting with their emotions»), with less than a week to go before the federal elections. One is delighted by this news, although during the current election campaign the party has been too focused on the Green Shift and business, and not enough on Working Canada. If the Liberal Party of Canada could form a minority government, there is chance at it being genuinely progressive, however if they form the official opposition, one is afraid that nothing more than the Ghost-Opposition status quo will exist.

As a future Official Opposition, the Liberal Party of Canada must stand by its values and its core beliefs, and ensure that the Conservative government not press ahead with its agenda. The progressive vote in Parliament is strong, with the Bloc, the NDP and the Liberals there is no question that so much more could be done to help stem the tide of Conservative law-making by working together (and not abstaining so much!).

The Conservative government must not be allowed to:

Attack Canadian freedoms
Cut culture subsidies
Flagrantly disregard the common Canadian concern for the environment

The Official Opposition and other parties must push for:

Nation child-care scheme
Increased healthcare funding
Free post-secondary education

Liberal policies have heart, however energies are misdirected

2008-10-05T10:30:00.000-04:00

Liberal leader Stéphane Dion has been busy the past few days trying to cul the advance of the NDP on the national level by a. trying to advance his parties newest and most forward thinking policies, arguing that they are the heartened centre of Canadian politics, and b. by painting the New Democratic Party as an old-guard bastion of socialism, an anachronistic artefact of a by-gone era. Dion's main points:

The NDP wants to tax companies, which will lead to job losses
We want to cut taxes for everyone
We will control the economy to a reasonable degree

Is this enough to compel people to believe that a more laissez-faire approach to the economy, that which is advocated by both the Conservative Party and unfortunately the Liberal Party of Canada? The Democrats and Republicans of the United States have both for years touted the hands-off approach towards the economy as the way forward, have they been vindicated? What the NDP wants to do is to take some of the massive profits which have been reaped by Canadian and foreign companies and invest it in the Canadian masses. Any party that is not in favour of that should take a good look at themselves and ask who are they working for?

There is much to be said for the Liberal approach, it at least takes notice that there are problems in the current taxation system, and that there must be a remedy. However placing all of their eggs in one environmentally-themed basket seems politically naive. Canadians care about the environment, but there are ways to address those concerns without neglecting other priorities, such as healthcare, housing, job security, and of course education.

Bloc Highlights: Their Platform «Présent pour le Québec»

2008-10-01T10:14:00.000-04:00

In their 2008 Election manifesto, the Bloc Québécois has certainly convinced itself that it is party of a two-party system when Québec goes to the polls on the 14th, nearly every paragraph has some dedicated (unfavourable) comparison to the Conservative Party of Canada or Harper himself, but the document does end with some proposals for the future, which it promises to put forward in the coming legislative session, the best ones being:

8 000 tax credit to graduates who return to the regions to live and work
Immediately increase the monthly benefits for the least wealthy seniors by 110$
Adopt Federal Pay Equality Act

These are some genuinely worth-while proposals, and one can't think that any of the parties would be able to object to it. The development of the regions of this country (though in the Bloc's case they are referring to the Québécois regions) would be greatly enhanced by the granting of such a hefty tax credit to those who where planning on returning to their native rural areas and help offset the cost of living while trying to find sufficient employment in the often tough labour market. 1320$ extra for the poorest elderly, who could be opposed to that. And a Federal Pay Equality Act, well, it's really a no brainer.

Canadian Conservatives: Kings of Contradiction

2008-09-30T12:39:00.000-04:00

Under the «issues» heading «Accountability», the Conservative Party of Canada seems to have forgotten on what side of the issues they actually stand. They claim to have strengthened democracy in Canada by:

Introducing legislation to facilitate the election of Senators
Introducing legislation to end the lifetime appointment of Senators by limiting Senate terms to eight years

They seem to forget that they are wasting millions on the undemocratic House of Lords, and are the most fervent supporters of it's continued existence. But that isn't the worst of it, they seem to have forgotten that they called a «snap» election not one month ago, and yet, tout their accomplishments as having:

Instituted fixed election dates

Someone should really update that site...

For Election '08 Canada, the NDP may be the way forward

2008-09-30T11:09:00.000-04:00

The Liberal political sphere in Canada has a rich political history and an admirable record in government for working for the people of Canada, to advance their interests, and build a better Canada. However, these days, Federal Liberals shy away from affiliation with the working class, and make no secret of their pro-business agenda. As a Marxist, one is constantly conflicted between the attraction one feels towards the Liberal Party of Québec, and the growing antipathy one feels towards the Liberal Party of Canada, which although presents a good-hearted and compassionate face, really seems to lack the ability to truly represent the working class of Canada.

The Federal Liberal Party no longer seems to represent the interests ordinary Canadians during this election campaign. They do have an impressive scheme, called 30-50, 30 percent reduction in the number of people in poverty, 50 percent reduction in child poverty. However their plan to implement is ridiculous, a few thousand dollars in tax credits is hardly the way to tackle poverty, which is simply an expression of the class antagonisms that are intrinsic in the capitalist system.

The New Democratic Party of Canada is far from advocating the democratic and socialist transformation of society for the betterment of all Canadians, however they do understand that the current system is not working, and have committed themselves in the past, and in the future towards reducing the gap between rich and poor, fighting poverty and inequality. The party is the only one that seems to genuinely care about the needs of the working class during this election campaign. That is why, for this election, one must support the NDP, while remaining and identifying as a Liberal.

U.S. House votes NO to bailout

2008-09-29T14:41:00.000-04:00

The collective American taxpayer can breath a deep sigh of relief as their tax bill is sparred a 2200$ increase by the United States House of Representatives votes no to the proposed bailout package agreed upon by party leaders earlier in the day. This was an example of the worst kind of capitalism, a rampant, blatant attack on the working class in an attempt to salvage a system so fundamentally flawed that it is now collapsing in upon itself, as it is destined to do. Boom and bust will never end as long as profit rules the economic agenda...

In a crisis the capitalists are compelled to resort to extraordinary measures to corner a share of a decreased market. They resort to discount selling, dumping and other methods to undercut their competitors. By so doing, they aggravate the crisis by fomenting a deflationary downward spiral. People delay their purchases in the expectation of lower prices, and thus push prices lower still. We see this phenomenon most clearly in the housing market.

The contagion spreads like an uncontrollable epidemic from one country to another. It will become evident that every country has over-exported (that is, over-produced) and also over-imported (over-traded). (See Capital, Volume 3, p. 481) It will be evident that every one of them had stretched credit too far and stoked the fires of inflation and speculation, which now must be extinguished, no matter what the pain. That is to say, it is not a question of this country or that, of this bank or this individual speculator or that, but of the system itself. It is true that no downturn lasts forever. In the long run a new equilibrium is reached, prices stabilize, profitability is restored and a new cycle commences. But this is nowhere in sight as yet. The downturn has not ended. It has barely begun. Nobody knows how long it will last. And anyway, as Keynes once put it: "In the long run we are all dead."[IDOM, 29.9.08]