Andre Bosclair's win for the PQ
For starters, I am not a supporter of the Parti Quebecois and would never elect them, still with polls showing that they will likely win the next election in Quebec, I do have an interest in who they choose as leader. I would probably go Liberals if I lived in Quebec since despite his unpopularity, I think Jean Charest has being doing what is necessary to make Quebec economically strong. If I lived in a riding where the Action Democratique was more likely to win than the Liberals, I would then vote for them since Mario Dumont has promised to have moratorium on all future referendums even though he voted YES in 1995. Even though he is accused of being very right wing, he is more of a libertarian than a conservative as he is, like myself, right wing on economic issues, but left wing on social issues.
The fact Andre Bosclair took cocaine is really not a big issue for me just as Gordon Campbell's DUI record wasn't, nor was Sam Sullivan's mistake of buying cocaine for a drug addict an issue for me in the municipal election. Since politicians are human like all of us, I am more concerned about their policies than personality. I am also glad that Andre Bosclair is on the right of the Parti Quebecois (he is still to the left compared to Jean Charest or Mario Dumont, but not a socialist, but rather more in line with the federal liberals) since the last thing Quebec needs is a socialist leader who will wreck their economy.
I think this maybe a good thing for the Liberals as his decision to use cocaine, while not an issue for me, certainly won't help him. Also the fact he is on the right of the Parti Quebecois might cause some of the more left wing members to break away and form a left wing separtist party or support the UDF, which would split the separtist vote. I don't think the Liberals have much chance at winning a majority, but hopefully they can hold the PQ to a minority. If this happens, they could form a coalition with the Action Democratique who aren't too far apart, although a little further to the right.
The fact Andre Bosclair took cocaine is really not a big issue for me just as Gordon Campbell's DUI record wasn't, nor was Sam Sullivan's mistake of buying cocaine for a drug addict an issue for me in the municipal election. Since politicians are human like all of us, I am more concerned about their policies than personality. I am also glad that Andre Bosclair is on the right of the Parti Quebecois (he is still to the left compared to Jean Charest or Mario Dumont, but not a socialist, but rather more in line with the federal liberals) since the last thing Quebec needs is a socialist leader who will wreck their economy.
I think this maybe a good thing for the Liberals as his decision to use cocaine, while not an issue for me, certainly won't help him. Also the fact he is on the right of the Parti Quebecois might cause some of the more left wing members to break away and form a left wing separtist party or support the UDF, which would split the separtist vote. I don't think the Liberals have much chance at winning a majority, but hopefully they can hold the PQ to a minority. If this happens, they could form a coalition with the Action Democratique who aren't too far apart, although a little further to the right.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 11:52 AM
2 Comments:
Well I can say I am happy with Boisclair not being as leftist as some PQ, the one thing that concerns me is that he is trying to weasel his way out of the Clarity Act. That act is put in place to create terms for separation, as it constitutionally illegal for Quebec to just separate without discussion of terms beforehand. I will support Charest obviously, and though I think Boisclair is better than most in the PQ, I would like him to show more regard for the Calrity Act.
BC tory - I agree his decision to ignore the Clarity Act could be problematic. But since it is the supreme law of the land, I don't see how it is possible for him to ignore it, no matter how much he says he will do so. The federal government has every right to refuse to grant Quebec sovereignty in the event of a referendum. I think the real issue is many separtists want to leave Canada yet want to keep our army, not have to take 25% of the debt, keep their Canadian passports, and continue to receive transfer payments from the federal government. Quebecers need to understand that if they separate, they will not have a special partnership with Canada, but rather be treated like any other sovereign nation. I think if Quebecers realized it meant having their own army, taking 25% of the debt, no more transfer payments from Ottawa, and surrendering the Canadian citizenship (Those born elsewhere in Canada or who have one parent from the ROC could keep their citizenship as we allow dual citizenship with all other nations), I think support for sovereignty would be considerably lower. The hardcore separtists are willing to separate no matter what the cost is, but the soft nationalist will only support separation if they can keep all the benefits of Canada, while leave behind all the things they don't like about Canada. I think the government needs to next time set out the clear terms of what separation would mean and I think once Quebecers realized what it meant, they wouldn't support it. In 1995, 1/3 of Quebecers who voted YES thought Quebec would still remain part of Canada in the event of YES vote succeeding.
Post a Comment
<< Home