Right-wing xenophobia rising in Canada: anti-immigrant party wins surprise victory in Quebec.

[The Romulan Republic]

Following on Doug Ford's win in Ontario, now both of Canada's most populous and powerful provinces are controlled by Right-wing anti-immigrant governments. They're also planning to follow Ford's lead and use the notwithstanding clause to ban anyone from wearing religious symbols in the workplace (obviously targeting Muslims-I very much doubt that this will be enforced even-handedly against people wearing crosses, but it will force a lot of devout Muslim women out of the work place and into isolation and financial dependency on the men who are supposedly oppressing them).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal ... -1.4846838

Quebec's premier-designate says he is prepared to invoke the notwithstanding clause to enforce a prohibitions on any public employee from wearing a religious symbol in the workplace.

Francois Legault would also move swiftly to reduce the number of immigrants allowed into the province by 20 per cent.

He made the comments Tuesday, at his first news conference since his Coalition Avenir Quebec won a decisive majority in Monday's provincial election, beating out the incumbent Liberals.

The CAQ wants to pass a secular charter that would go further than the Quebec Liberals' religious neutrality law, which is already the subject of a constitutional challenge.

Legault said he will raise the legal age limit for cannabis from 18 to 21, though not before it becomes legal across Canada for recreational use later this month.

He also promised to go ahead with a pledge to abolish school boards, another move likely to face a court challenge from Anglophone groups that argue it would infringe on their rights.

Though not mentioned in this article, they're also reportedly supporting a "values test" for immigrants to remain in the country (also doubtless directed primarily at Muslims). In other words: the government gets to tell you what to think if you want to live here.

Given their disproportionate influence and population, if you've got Ontario and Quebec, you've basically got Canada. So unless something major changes before the next Federal election, we can probably anticipate Canada being ruled by an Alt. Reich, Trump-style xenophobic government that thinks that refugees should just be left to die and is willing to violate the Charter to do it.

I know its not remotely likely to happen, but at this point, all Centre and Left-wing parties should consider merging and forming a single party to ensure that vote splitting does not give the Alt. Reich control of Canada. And yet, most Canadians who aren't openly supporting this shit seem largely oblivious to it. Canadians look down on those backward, stupid Americans, and yet Canadians are content to let the same fucking thing happen here, even with the example of what's happened in the US to warn them.

Seriously, what sort of demented being looks at what's happened in the US over the last few years and thinks "Yeah, I want me some of that up here"?

[muse]

You don't seem to have a grasp of Quebec's history...

[The Romulan Republic]

You don't seem to have a grasp of Quebec's history...

I'm well aware that Quebec politics has long been poisoned by xenophobic nationalism to an extent- and I think I've made my view of the secessionists quite clear. But as noted in the article, this vote represents a distinct Right-ward shift, and a more extreme position on the issue of religious symbols, than that of the outgoing Quebec Liberal government. Nor is it happening in a vacuum. If it were just in Quebec, I might be able to view it as just Quebec being Quebec. But this is following right on the victory of Doug Ford in Ontario, his embrace of anti-immigrant politics and meeting with white nationalists, and his use of the Notwithstanding Clause to override Charter rights (an example Quebec now intends to follow). And it follows on a tide of far Right nationalism toppling government after government across the western world over the last few years.

But go on- pretend that this is just "business as usual", just like people did (and to some extent still do) about Donald Trump. No doubt you'll sleep easier in the comforting assurance that It Can Never Happen Here.

Just don't say I didn't warn you after the next election Makes Canada Great Again.

[Jub]

But go on- pretend that this is just "business as usual", just like people did (and to some extent still do) about Donald Trump. No doubt you'll sleep easier in the comforting assurance that It Can Never Happen Here.

Just don't say I didn't warn you after the next election Makes Canada Great Again.

The fuck do you want me to do about it? I live in BC and have voted between Liberal and NDP as strategy and local issues have required. As a province, we're already ignored at the federal level and are defending against the building of a pipeline that we don't want but everybody east of the Rockies wants to shove down our throats. I'll vote for the best left of center party that has a chance to make noise at the federal level but the fact of the matter is a BC vote doesn't count like an Ontario or Quebec vote even though we're the 3rd largest province by population.

[The Romulan Republic]

But go on- pretend that this is just "business as usual", just like people did (and to some extent still do) about Donald Trump. No doubt you'll sleep easier in the comforting assurance that It Can Never Happen Here.

Just don't say I didn't warn you after the next election Makes Canada Great Again.

The fuck do you want me to do about it? I live in BC and have voted between Liberal and NDP as strategy and local issues have required. As a province, we're already ignored at the federal level and are defending against the building of a pipeline that we don't want but everybody east of the Rockies wants to shove down our throats. I'll vote for the best left of center party that has a chance to make noise at the federal level but the fact of the matter is a BC vote doesn't count like an Ontario or Quebec vote even though we're the 3rd largest province by population.

I wasn't blaming you- you might be able to tell by how that post wasn't addressed to you.

Edit: And yeah, it sucks beyond belief that our "democracy" is structured to give some parts of the country more influence than others, and to allow provinces to opt out of the law if they don't like it. I hate it just as much as I do similar attempts to weight the scales in the US, like the Electoral College.

[Jub]

I wasn't blaming you- you might be able to tell by how that post wasn't addressed to you.

Edit: And yeah, it sucks beyond belief that our "democracy" is structured to give some parts of the country more influence than others, and to allow provinces to opt out of the law if they don't like it. I hate it just as much as I do similar attempts to weight the scales in the US, like the Electoral College.

Yeah, I get that you weren't talking to me or even Muse it's just frustration.

I'm less worried than you are about what these recent elections mean, but I also have to accept that my vote is a drop in the bucket and a drop from the tap furthest from said bucket to boot.

[The Romulan Republic]

I wasn't blaming you- you might be able to tell by how that post wasn't addressed to you.

Edit: And yeah, it sucks beyond belief that our "democracy" is structured to give some parts of the country more influence than others, and to allow provinces to opt out of the law if they don't like it. I hate it just as much as I do similar attempts to weight the scales in the US, like the Electoral College.

Yeah, I get that you weren't talking to me or even Muse it's just frustration.

I'm less worried than you are about what these recent elections mean, but I also have to accept that my vote is a drop in the bucket and a drop from the tap furthest from said bucket to boot.

Then put your efforts into provincial/local government. If worst comes to worst, tyranny at the Federal level can be resisted by progressives at the provincial and local level.

You know, as much as I think its a bad law and should be abolished, as long as its there, if a far Right government were elected I'd find it absolutely delicious for provincial governments to give them a taste of their own medicine via the Notwithstanding Clause.

[Tribble]

But go on- pretend that this is just "business as usual", just like people did (and to some extent still do) about Donald Trump. No doubt you'll sleep easier in the comforting assurance that It Can Never Happen Here.

Just don't say I didn't warn you after the next election Makes Canada Great Again.

The fuck do you want me to do about it? I live in BC and have voted between Liberal and NDP as strategy and local issues have required. As a province, we're already ignored at the federal level and are defending against the building of a pipeline that we don't want but everybody east of the Rockies wants to shove down our throats. I'll vote for the best left of center party that has a chance to make noise at the federal level but the fact of the matter is a BC vote doesn't count like an Ontario or Quebec vote even though we're the 3rd largest province by population.

I wasn't blaming you- you might be able to tell by how that post wasn't addressed to you.

Edit: And yeah, it sucks beyond belief that our "democracy" is structured to give some parts of the country more influence than others, and to allow provinces to opt out of the law if they don't like it. I hate it just as much as I do similar attempts to weight the scales in the US, like the Electoral College.

Ok, I'll bite.

I am curious about your position on Ontario; proportionately speaking it has fewer seats per capita in the House of Commons than any other province except for Alberta. It's influence comes from sheer size. Yes B.C. is the 3rd largest province... but Ontario has nearly three times the population. Hell, Ontario's population is more or less equal to all the other provinces and territories combined (excluding Quebec). If we are going by the principle that voters should be more or less treated equally (again Ontario is 2nd last after Alberta), it's not like Ontario is going out of its way to rig the deck and cheat to deliberately screw over other provinces or something.

Quebec does have parts of the constitution catering to it over the other provinces (plus all the history and politics), so in that respect it has more influence than other provinces than it otherwise might. But bear in mind that it still has twice the population as third ranking B.C.

Between the two they have more than 60% of the population, so... it really shouldn't come as a surprise that they have the most influence.

Now, there is certainly an argument to be made that in order to balance things perhaps there should be a "great compromise" in the Senate where every province has equal number of elected Senators. Plus making the Senators elected and act as a proper check of course. And if we were to elect the Governor General one day, and want to make sure that it's not just about Ontario and Quebec... we'd have to put in something like the Electoral College, though maybe make it proportional to each province rather than "winner take all".

[Coop D'etat]

But go on- pretend that this is just "business as usual", just like people did (and to some extent still do) about Donald Trump. No doubt you'll sleep easier in the comforting assurance that It Can Never Happen Here.

Just don't say I didn't warn you after the next election Makes Canada Great Again.

The fuck do you want me to do about it? I live in BC and have voted between Liberal and NDP as strategy and local issues have required. As a province, we're already ignored at the federal level and are defending against the building of a pipeline that we don't want but everybody east of the Rockies wants to shove down our throats. I'll vote for the best left of center party that has a chance to make noise at the federal level but the fact of the matter is a BC vote doesn't count like an Ontario or Quebec vote even though we're the 3rd largest province by population.

Polling on the matter indicates that a majority of BCers actually support Transmountain. Its a narrow geographical region within BC that opposes it, but they are electorally relevant due to the need current government for Green party support to hold power.


As for the election of the CAQ. The degree that they are scary xenophobes is probably vastly over stated. Their leadership doesn't have much of the way of strong convictions on the matter and appear to be engaging in the usual soft nationalist pandering the non-Liberal Quebec parties engage in. Its more business as usual there than sign of a global rise of bigotry. The Marois era Parti Quebecios were if anything more obnoxious about it than the CAQists.

[The Romulan Republic]

Parti Quebecois can suck a dick in any era, as far as I'm concerned.

The fuck do you want me to do about it? I live in BC and have voted between Liberal and NDP as strategy and local issues have required. As a province, we're already ignored at the federal level and are defending against the building of a pipeline that we don't want but everybody east of the Rockies wants to shove down our throats. I'll vote for the best left of center party that has a chance to make noise at the federal level but the fact of the matter is a BC vote doesn't count like an Ontario or Quebec vote even though we're the 3rd largest province by population.

I wasn't blaming you- you might be able to tell by how that post wasn't addressed to you.

Edit: And yeah, it sucks beyond belief that our "democracy" is structured to give some parts of the country more influence than others, and to allow provinces to opt out of the law if they don't like it. I hate it just as much as I do similar attempts to weight the scales in the US, like the Electoral College.

Ok, I'll bite.

I am curious about your position on Ontario; proportionately speaking it has fewer seats per capita in the House of Commons than any other province except for Alberta. It's influence comes from sheer size. Yes B.C. is the 3rd largest province... but Ontario has nearly three times the population. Hell, Ontario's population is more or less equal to all the other provinces and territories combined (excluding Quebec). If we are going by the principle that voters should be more or less treated equally (again Ontario is 2nd last after Alberta), it's not like Ontario is going out of its way to rig the deck and cheat to deliberately screw over other provinces or something.

Quebec does have parts of the constitution catering to it over the other provinces (plus all the history and politics), so in that respect it has more influence than other provinces than it otherwise might. But bear in mind that it still has twice the population as third ranking B.C.

Between the two they have more than 60% of the population, so... it really shouldn't come as a surprise that they have the most influence.

Now, there is certainly an argument to be made that in order to balance things perhaps there should be a "great compromise" in the Senate where every province has equal number of elected Senators. Plus making the Senators elected and act as a proper check of course. And if we were to elect the Governor General one day, and want to make sure that it's not just about Ontario and Quebec... we'd have to put in something like the Electoral College, though maybe make it proportional to each province rather than "winner take all".

Yes, its reasonable that Ontario and Quebec would have the most representation due to having the most population, although its also understandably frustrating to a lot of voters in other provinces. IIRC, this dilemma is why the US has two houses in its legislature: one which represents by population and one which gives each state equal representation. Canada has two houses in its legislature because... I don't bloody know.

Nonetheless, it is simply a fact that Quebec and Ontario between them can pretty much dictate to the rest of Canada on a lot of things- and that's a scary thought, given recent events in provincial politics.

But Quebec's privileged position has always been a sore spot, with me and many others. I understand the history behind it, but the Seven Years' War was a long time ago, and there are groups that have suffered far more in recent times than French Canadians who do not enjoy such privileges.

[Jub]

Polling on the matter indicates that a majority of BCers actually support Transmountain. Its a narrow geographical region within BC that opposes it, but they are electorally relevant due to the need current government for Green party support to hold power.

Not here in Vancouver or in the communities that the pipeline will go through. It's easier to be for something that doesn't hurt you and doubly so when you'll see a benefit without the risk.

I am curious about your position on Ontario; proportionately speaking it has fewer seats per capita in the House of Commons than any other province except for Alberta. It's influence comes from sheer size. Yes B.C. is the 3rd largest province... but Ontario has nearly three times the population. Hell, Ontario's population is more or less equal to all the other provinces and territories combined (excluding Quebec). If we are going by the principle that voters should be more or less treated equally (again Ontario is 2nd last after Alberta), it's not like Ontario is going out of its way to rig the deck and cheat to deliberately screw over other provinces or something.

The more populous the region the lesser power each voter tends to have. It's the same for California and New York in the US and France and Germany in the EU too.

The issue is when they push through legislation on a national scale that is okay for them, usually not even anything great, but that hurts the west coast. That combined with Quebec getting special treatment across the board is a sore point out here. It's tough when BC has issues the rest of the nation doesn't deal with and it takes forever to get them dealt with at the federal level.

There's no reason for it except that the rest of the country doesn't get left west of the Rockies.

[Coop D'etat]

Polling on the matter indicates that a majority of BCers actually support Transmountain. Its a narrow geographical region within BC that opposes it, but they are electorally relevant due to the need current government for Green party support to hold power.

Not here in Vancouver or in the communities that the pipeline will go through. It's easier to be for something that doesn't hurt you and doubly so when you'll see a benefit without the risk.

So then we're clear that its not BC itself that objects to the pipeline, its local NIMBYism. That the locals might not care much for a project that's in net in the national interest is why these things are federally regulated in the first place.

In this case, Vancouver happens to sit on the location of a crucial economic right of way as its the only Canadian Pacific port of any size. The city and surrounding region has benefited massively from this, but they don't get to pick and choose which industries get to traffic through said port.

[Jub]

So then we're clear that its not BC itself that objects to the pipeline, its local NIMBYism. That the locals might not care much for a project that's in net in the national interest is why these things are federally regulated in the first place.

In this case, Vancouver happens to sit on the location of a crucial economic right of way as its the only Canadian Pacific port of any size. The city and surrounding region has benefited massively from this, but they don't get to pick and choose which industries get to traffic through said port.

Except that we do get that vote, hence why the pipeline hasn't been built yet. Furthermore, it's not our fault Alberta spent like a sailor on shore leave while oil prices were high and is now whining that a province they did no favors for won't do one in return.

Like it or not if that pipeline leaks or a tanker spills we're the ones cleaning it up and given that the oil isn't being produced here we won't see nearly the kind of economic return needed for it to make sense to build a pipeline. If you want to make more money off the oil refine it at home rather than shipping it off to China and having it sold back to us. Or just stop with the environmental disastrous fracking until the prices properly justify the ecological harm.

[Coop D'etat]

So then we're clear that its not BC itself that objects to the pipeline, its local NIMBYism. That the locals might not care much for a project that's in net in the national interest is why these things are federally regulated in the first place.

In this case, Vancouver happens to sit on the location of a crucial economic right of way as its the only Canadian Pacific port of any size. The city and surrounding region has benefited massively from this, but they don't get to pick and choose which industries get to traffic through said port.

Except that we do get that vote, hence why the pipeline hasn't been built yet. Furthermore, it's not our fault Alberta spent like a sailor on shore leave while oil prices were high and is now whining that a province they did no favors for won't do one in return.

Like it or not if that pipeline leaks or a tanker spills we're the ones cleaning it up and given that the oil isn't being produced here we won't see nearly the kind of economic return needed for it to make sense to build a pipeline. If you want to make more money off the oil refine it at home rather than shipping it off to China and having it sold back to us. Or just stop with the environmental disastrous fracking until the prices properly justify the ecological harm.

The entire purpose of an economic federation is that you don't have to rely on "favours." This isn't a matter of prid pro quo, national infrastructure gets built if its in the collective national interest and Canadian interests can get right of way across the country. Access to a port within the same country isn't a favour that the port city grants on the interior, its part of the standard deal of being in the same country.


You're also parroting some lower Mainlander nonsense about why the pipeline is needed in the first place. Its not about Albertan debt levels or whatnot, its about the price differential between Western Canadian Select and the general world price of oil or even West Texan Intermediate. Insufficient pipeline infrastructure means that Albertan Oil can't effectively be moved from the interior of the continent where its produced to its customers. This produces a local glut, which greatly depresses the price and allows external buyers to get it at a steep discount compared to what they can sell it for. This lack of essential capacity is producing price differentials above $30 a barrel and is effectively acting as a multi-billion dollar subsidy to American interests.
The lack of pipeline capacity is also forcing the reliance on rail transport, which is considerably less safe and enviromentally friendly than pipelines, which are the best way to move oil around. The oil is already coming into Vancouver on trains, which is much less good for the locals than it coming in on pipelines.

Refining it locally is also a moronic idea that keeps being kicked around. There is no economic benefit to refining crude local to its point of production. Crude Oil is in demand generally and gets shipped to local regions and then refined according to local needs. There isn't any particular demand for refined oil products that can be met by refining more in the Edmonton region. What is in demand currently is heavy crude oil, its just hard to get all of it from where its being produced to where its needed. Refineries also are huge capital projects in a mature technology that garners poor return on investment. Suggesting as you are that the answer is for Alberta to expand its refining capacity is the singularly dumb suggestion that people with no actual understanding of the oil and gas industry tend to make.

If we're talking about the risks of marine spills, the effect of the new pipeline would be marginal compared to what's already locally tolerated. Pipeline proponents like to pretend that the Georgia Straight is some virgin territory, but is simply isn't. Its already a major thoroughfare of shipping traffic. Transmountain wouldn't even be that big of an increase in overall tanker traffic to the area. It would greatly increase the Albertan oil sent by traffic, but that amount is dwarfed by the regular traffic of Alaskan crude to Seattle in essentially the same waters. The locals were already living next to a major oil shipping route, they just didn't no because nobody bothered to make a political stink about it.

Local opinion might not like the idea, but this is a case where local opinion is apparently largely informed by disinformation and its really not up to them in the first place.

[Tribble]

Yes, its reasonable that Ontario and Quebec would have the most representation due to having the most population, although its also understandably frustrating to a lot of voters in other provinces. IIRC, this dilemma is why the US has two houses in its legislature: one which represents by population and one which gives each state equal representation. Canada has two houses in its legislature because... I don't bloody know.

The Canadian Senate was based on the House of Lords and was intended to be a house of "sober second thought." Unlike the US Senate it was not really designed for separation of powers, but more for revising and reviewing legislation before it comes into effect. Hence why members are appointed for life; they don't have the democratic legitimacy to be constantly butting heads with the House of Commons, but they do have the ability to act more impartially and slow things down a lot when they feel the need to (which does happen on occasion). Apparently they also do quite a number of studies and revisions of legislation which simply goes unremarked on because its fairly routine.

Now, one can certainly question the effectiveness of this approach, but the Senate does more or less continue to function as originally intended.

The more populous the region the lesser power each voter tends to have. It's the same for California and New York in the US and France and Germany in the EU too.

The issue is when they push through legislation on a national scale that is okay for them, usually not even anything great, but that hurts the west coast. That combined with Quebec getting special treatment across the board is a sore point out here. It's tough when BC has issues the rest of the nation doesn't deal with and it takes forever to get them dealt with at the federal level.

There's no reason for it except that the rest of the country doesn't get left west of the Rockies.

Just to be clear Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario supported the Energy East pipeline to New Brunswick; Quebec was the one that objected. Which was kinda odd given the Lac-Megantic rail disaster (which involved crude oil) but I digress. Anyways, like Trans mountain Trudeau should have gone ahead and built the pipeline anyways especially given the absurdity of Eastern Canada having to import its oil from other countries. So ya, there's kind of a double standard there on Trudeau's part, though it didn't come as much of a surprise.

[Coop D'etat]

Yes, its reasonable that Ontario and Quebec would have the most representation due to having the most population, although its also understandably frustrating to a lot of voters in other provinces. IIRC, this dilemma is why the US has two houses in its legislature: one which represents by population and one which gives each state equal representation. Canada has two houses in its legislature because... I don't bloody know.

The Canadian Senate was based on the House of Lords and was intended to be a house of "sober second thought." Unlike the US Senate it was not really designed for separation of powers, but more for revising and reviewing legislation before it comes into effect. Hence why members are appointed for life; they don't have the democratic legitimacy to be constantly butting heads with the House of Commons, but they do have the ability to act more impartially and slow things down a lot when they feel the need to (which does happen on occasion). Apparently they also do quite a number of studies and revisions of legislation which simply goes unremarked on because its fairly routine.

Now, one can certainly question the effectiveness of this approach, but the Senate does more or less continue to function as originally intended.

The more populous the region the lesser power each voter tends to have. It's the same for California and New York in the US and France and Germany in the EU too.

The issue is when they push through legislation on a national scale that is okay for them, usually not even anything great, but that hurts the west coast. That combined with Quebec getting special treatment across the board is a sore point out here. It's tough when BC has issues the rest of the nation doesn't deal with and it takes forever to get them dealt with at the federal level.

There's no reason for it except that the rest of the country doesn't get left west of the Rockies.

Just to be clear Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario supported the Energy East pipeline to New Brunswick; Quebec was the one that objected. Which was kinda odd given the Lac-Megantic rail disaster (which involved crude oil) but I digress. Anyways, like Trans mountain Trudeau should have gone ahead and built the pipeline anyways especially given the absurdity of Eastern Canada having to import its oil from other countries. So ya, there's kind of a double standard there on Trudeau's part, though it didn't come as much of a surprise.

The problem with Energy East was always that Western Canadian crude is heavy oil and all the refinery capacity in the East is for light crude. It doesn't make economic sense to modify the existing refineries to handle Albertan oil rather than to buy it on the world market. The only way there was an economic case for Energy East was if both Keystone XXL and Transmountain failed to be built and there was no other option for getting the stuff out of the prairies. When it became clear that Keystone and Transmountain both were relatively likely to be built, business enthusiasm for the less good option of going east evaporated.

In other words, Trudeau didn't kill Energy East at all, the market did, which is why the application to build it was withdrawn. It wasn't at any point rejected by the Federal government, the idea it was is a conservative talking point built on misinformation.