[michou]

Why do so many leaders come from Québec ?<br /> <br /> Interesting question. <br /> Hummmmm.... maybe because they are more intelligent, better looking, more educated, more outspoken, richer, better liars ? Wrong answers. <br /> <br /> Maybe because growing up and/or living in Québec gives you a better understanding of what nationhood is all about ? I think that's about right.

[Spud]

Interesting question!Some years ago I was asking myself the same thing,I could not figure an answer then,and I still can't<br /> I agree Montreal is more diversified than Calgary/Vancouver/Winnipeg/Toronto.<br /> I think michou has it right. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/wink.gif' alt='Wink'>

[Dr Caleb]

You forgot one, between Trudeau and Turner. Joe Clark actually came from the West.

[Spud]

Joe who? <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/mrgreen.gif' alt='Mr. Green'>

[Dr Caleb]

Don't fall for the CONservatives mantra. Joe Clark was probabally the last PM who cared more for Canada than for the big corporate board position he'd get after being PM.<br />

[samuel]

Another point is that Quebecers are passionate about politics and I think this appeals to Canadians. Someone mentioned Joe Clark and while I have no doubts as to his "caring" for Canada, could you find a more uncharismatic individual? Stephen Harper and Paul Martin are also drab, both are not from Québec.

[Marcarc]

I doubt very much that somehow the 'magic that is Montreal' (yeah, OK) produced these leaders. Ask anybody from the periphery (maritimes, prairies, BC) and they'll tell you Canada has always been governed from the centre. So long as you tow the Ontario-Quebec line, you'll be all right. Gee, most have strong ties to Ontario AND Quebec, and what a coincidence-Ontario and Quebec have 60% of the seats. Another coincidence-Canada is a bilingual country, but in Ontario you can get by without french, but not in Quebec. So if you are going to groom a leader who will win both provinces, who would you pick? Ideally, you'd have an anglicized Quebecer-or a francophone Ontarian-if you can find one. Trouble is in Ontario, Torontonians distrust Ottawans almost as much as they do westerners-just for different reasons. But Ontario is more comfortable with a Quebecer than a westerner, it helps them feel superior that they are at least 'really trying' to appease Quebec, which makes them smugly rest assured that separatists are being unreasonable. <br /> <br /> The other item not mentioned is the fact that Trudeau, Chretien, Mulroney, and Martin all either worked for, or had extremely close ties with the Power Corporation. Gee, could money win elections? Gee, could politics be influenced by big business? Of course not, who could believe such a thing! <br /> <br /> An interesting thing to note is that Power Corporation is truly a Quebec-Ontario entity, Paul Desmarais is from Sudbury and the corporation has extensive branches in both provinces. <br /> <br /> So as long as your 'federal dream' is an Ontario-Quebec dream, you'll whip any westerner anytime. The maritimes are equally afraid of being cut off the dole (and rightfully so, they'd be third world provinces without the feds). The fact that conservatives get so many votes is what is unusual, and shows that nothing in politics is stable. <br /> <br /> As for the cities, well, duh, if you are in a french province and don't speak french very well then obviously you stick out, while in other provinces they speak english, and don't care how well you speak it. In fact, I'd claim the opposite is true from what was mentioned, my french is not great, but passable, and I get smirks and scoffs every time I speak in Quebec. If they also speak english they will immediately switch to english, even if I continue in french. This is a pretty common anecdote, so my experience is not singular. There is a reason that there is a stereotype of the 'snooty french'. Here in southern ontario you can speak english with any kind of accent and only passably well and people couldn't care less. So in fact I'd suggest that 'standing out like a sore thumb' is a good indication of the LACK of multicultural sensibilities, not an affirmation of them.

[michou]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] So in fact I'd suggest that 'standing out like a sore thumb' is a good indication of the LACK of multicultural sensibilities, not an affirmation of them.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Québécers in general couldn't care less about how thick someone's accent is in French. They will praise you for trying but that will depend on the content of the message and the attitude one is using for saying it ... <br /> <br /> Western Canada will eventually 'produce' leaders that appeal (or not) across the entire national spectrum but first, Canada had to get rid of that British outpost colonial attitude which it kept for much much too long. <br /> "Canada" may have been born in 1867 but it wasn't until after the second world war that this nation started to stand on its own and not just as another British "subsiduary". Besides the money and the corporation trails mentionned by Marcarc, French Canadiens have for a very very very long time been attached to their North American roots. Since the conquest, they only had themselves to rely on for the very survival of their culture, language and their society. This reinforced their own sense of nationhood as they did not have some distant "mère patrie" to control their destiny, contrary to Canadians who looked towards Britain to control and dictate theirs. It would thus be normal that leaders, capable of speaking for the entire Canadian nation, would originate from a society where this way of thinking is as natural as to one's sense of belonging to a specific place in time.

[Marcarc]

I've NEVER been 'praised for trying' by any quebecer, and my wife, who has even better french and spends more time there, affirms the same. I knew I was treading on shaky ground saying 'Quebecers...' anything. Obviously people are all over the spectrum, and I would suggest the same is true of cities. It truly takes a while to really get to know a city, which of course means the people and organizations of a city. Here in Waterloo the music scene is very different than in Kitchener, which is very different from the music scene in Cambridge, even though the three cities are literally connected. So I think derogatory remarks about various cities is out of line. <br /> <br /> I confess I didn't follow the reasoning of the above. We are obviously talking about recent history, starting with Trudeau, so I'm not sure exactly why the above holds true. Obviously, to get elected in Ontario you have to make the party speak for Ontario. Trudeau was FROM Quebec, and very active there, so appealed to Quebecers. Likewise, his idea of a new federalism was to entrench power in Ontario and Quebec, which appealed in Ontario. However, Trudeau NEVER won the votes of more than half of canadians, that was only done by Mulroney in 1988, where the real debate was about free trade. As we know, like many a politician, Mulroney was against free trade until he was elected. Personalities have something to do with it, but so does policy.<br /> <br />

[samuel]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc]In fact, I'd claim the opposite is true from what was mentioned, my french is not great, but passable, and I get smirks and scoffs every time I speak in Quebec.[/QUOTE]<br /> Now read this quote of yours Marcarc:<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Marcarc]Your english is so bad that I actually can't even understand what you are talking about.[/QUOTE]<br /> That's <a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?forum=6&showtopic=9183&mode=&onlytopic=&show=20&page=1">you</a> saying that to me, a French person trying to participate on an English forum. What you said about Quebecers in the first quote is a big fat exageration. In fact, Quebecers find accents somewhat charming and appreciate anyone trying his/her best to "accomodate" the language.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Marcarc]If they also speak english they will immediately switch to english, even if I continue in french. This is a pretty common anecdote, so my experience is not singular.[/QUOTE]<br /> This is absolutely true. I do it all the time to persons with English accents, but this is out of accomodation and not about being smug.<br />

[MadeInCanada]

Indeed, I will switch to English with someone struggling in French immediately. This isn't done to denigrate the French skills of the other conversing party, but rather out of accomodation. If I'm fluent in both languages, and the other person is fluent only in English, why on Earth must we speak French? Given that most tourists from English Canada stay in Montreal, where almost everyone is bilingual, that's what you get. <br /> <br /> It's all about hospitality <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'><br /> <br /> That said, commendation for you and your wife for gaining a working knowledge of French. Believe me, if you ever travel to the rural area of Québec, you will need it!<br /> <br /> It is admirable and I wish more non-Quebeccers would do it. I believe if the "Rest of Canada" (I really hate using that term) made a better effort to understand and respect Québec, instead of just throwing money at it, separatism would not even be a serious issue. <br /> <br /> One thing that really peeved me about the "No" rally in Montréal in 1995 was that no one could speak French from outside Québec. I understand not everyone is going to pick it up as a 2nd language, but I really mean [b]no one[/b] spoke French!!! I would have had an easier time finding an left-handed immigrant bagpipe technician in that crowd than a bilingual person who wasn't from Montréal.<br /> <br /> Alright, that was a bit of a long rant, but back to the topic at hand. <br /> <br /> I am sorry to have omitted Joe Clark, but he was a blip in the Trudeau era. It totally slipped my mind. Nevertheless, the result is the same for him as it is for Kim Campbell, so it's not like adding Joe to the list somehow invalidates my observation.<br /> <br /> While it is true that the last 4 Quebeccers have ties to Power Corporation, I don't see this as a deciding factor. There is tons of money out west. If buying an election was possible, don't think Suncore or Talisman wouldn't be doing it. The fact is, money only helps a candidate get exposure, and the beauty of democracy is that the voter always has the final say, no matter how much money you spend. Now, I say this with full certainty, but if Stephen Harper had a campaign warchest of $50 billion, he still won't be elected as PM in the next election. No amount of money is going to make him appealing.<br /> <br /> It always boils down to personality, leadership, appeal, image etc., and to a lesser extent policy (sadly, as this should be the first reason, but it isn't).

[Marcarc]

The response seems to be that it is virtually impossible to come across a belligerent francophone, that even though people in Canada don't know french, Quebecers are ALL accommodating and hospitality minded individuals, even through the rancor that was evident on both sides during the 95 referendum it's now being claimed that Quebecers are the most magnanimous people imagineable. Excuse me if I trust my own experiences and doubt that the people on the forum KNOW every Quebecer. The above quote from me is out of context, I suggest people go read through that entire thread and if I recall Samuel pretty much proved my point. I certainly didn't intend to insult ALL Quebecers, or even the majority, I was merely recounting my experiences and those of people I know. I admit that it was restricted to gas station attendants, hotel staff and waiters. And if THEY aren't accommodating then that's not a good sign. However, in a province of millions, experiences are purely a matter of chance. This is much the same as other places and my intent was to argue against putting Montreal on some higher plane of existence than other so-called 'banal' canadian cities. I could list the various exchanges I had, many of which were extremely rude, some of which were no doubt my own sensitivities, and others with might have been misunderstandings, but my point still stands. <br /> <br /> The abovementioned aspects about political appeal and such things are the 'mechanisms' used, NOT the force behind the movement. You can think that you live in some wondrous democracy, but I suggest you look closer. There IS plenty of money out west, and in the nineties they once again got their act together and have been forming the opposition ever since, and may very well finally form the next government. <br /> <br /> Again though, we come back to money and power. Westerners have money-but they have no power. Ontario and Quebec have 60% of the seats, with the east coast, which also distrusts the west, bringing it pretty close to three quarters. That isn't to say EVERYBODY in those places are for one party or another, as we've seen, both have very similar platforms on economic matters. Just for fun though, I looked at the results for the 1972 election and out west you saw the exact same thing, the majority voting for conservatives. However, new initiatives come along all the time, many conservatives will find Harper's views on gay marriage a more compelling reason to support him than any reservations they may have about economic policy. This is true even on the east coast. Harper is very specific about his derision of 'regional development' which would mean that you would think EVERY maritimer would vote liberal-but that's not the case. So long as you have a job then you may very well accept the conservatives, since ACOA is constantly belittled by the media as being corrupt and a waste of resources. <br /> <br /> Trudeau just barely held majority governments, and somebody should check but I don't think the total number of canadians who voted him over Clark was that great. Just because Trudeau had 'high visibility' and is held up to near mythological status by the Ontario press shouldn't blind us to the realities that he faced in office. For the west, I think you are finding something similar to what the east coast was doing in the first twenty years of last century, which was trying every mechanism available to get Ontario and Quebec to attend to the wide disparity of economic development in the regions. They couldn't do it because they didn't have the money OR the power. Out west, they have the money, which has kept the movement going through it's various incarnations-reform, alliance, conservatives. The east tried similar things, but didn't have nearly the seats or the wealth to prop up "the maritime rights movement". <br /> <br /> The other factor to consider is that a LOT of westerners are actually easterners, and they know full well how the east has been treated and what their famililies have lived through with resource based economies. Politics and people's motivators can never be tied down to one thing, but these are pretty big factors in my estimation, much bigger than the 'I voted Trudeau because I thought he was so charismatic', which I find somewhat insulting to the average voter, although might very well be true of some.<br /> <br /> Keep in mind though, that most of this analysis should take place at the party level, since that is where these issues most take place. There are only a small minority of canadians which actually choose our Prime Ministers, because they choose the three main leaders. After that it becomes public relations on how to 'sell' your candidate. Very little analysis in Canada is given to party nominations, although it is increasing, but that is where the real big decisions are made.

[michou]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] I certainly didn't intend to insult ALL Quebecers, or even the majority, I was merely recounting my experiences and those of people I know. I admit that it was restricted to gas station attendants, hotel staff and waiters. And if THEY aren't accommodating then that's not a good sign. ..................................<br /> I could list the various exchanges I had, many of which were extremely rude, some of which were no doubt my own sensitivities, and others with might have been misunderstandings, but my point still stands. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> In any language and anywhere I’ve been, I’ve found that just a meaningful smile and a nod can get you a long way in the understanding part and more often than not, more of the same back. <br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Marcarc] The abovementioned aspects about political appeal and such things are the 'mechanisms' used, NOT the force behind the movement. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> So what you are saying is that the political system provides the leaders and the East has profited from this arrangement ever since yet, the balance of power in Ottawa did shift when the Bloc arrived on the hill and it could well succeed once more in forming the official opposition. In one sense and in a different way, Québécers are still taking political leadership. Even its party leader, Gilles Duceppe, stood out during the last electoral debates in comparison to the other 3 party candidates. <br />

[MadeInCanada]

Marcarc, I've said it and I'll say it again. People vote for governments, not corporations. Ontario is currently _dying_ to vote anything else but Liberal. Jack Layton is too far left for the Golden Horseshoe and Stephen Harper is too far right. Perhaps if the CPC fielded a moderate, even from out of Quebec, the seats in Alberta + 1/2 Ontario + Rural Prairies is enough for form a majority. There isn't some east/west conspiracy here, it's just that the Conservative party has fielded leader after leader that don't allow it to expand outside it's narrow base of Alberta. <br /> <br /> I bet if the CPC fielded Jean Charest or Bernard Lord in the next federal election, the party would win over 100 seats. Canadians don't care about transfer payments, but they won't vote for someone who would have stood by GWB on Iraq, joined the Ballistic Missile Defence treaty, or brought the Bible closer to the Legislature. Yet time after time, the CPC fields this kind of candidate. Preston Manning, Stockwell Day, Stephen Harper. Get real!<br /> <br /> In 1984, Mulroney formed a West-Quebec alliance which allowed him to gain a majority with seats in the West and Quebec (Ontario was gravy). If any conservative steps up to the plate, there's no reason why we can't have a West-Ontario or a West-Quebec alliance. The reason Ontario and Quebec give the Liberals 120+ seats is the same reason the CPC could pick up a majority. <br /> <br /> But like I said, it isn't going to happen with all the George Bush juniors the party keeps offering up. The CPC needs a guy like Joe Clark, who can speak French and speak to all Canadians, not a "fellow" at the Frasier institute. <br /> <br /> As for your experiences concerning Quebec hospitality, it seems you're determined to believe that people spoke to you in English out of arrogance and not accomodation. There's nothing to be done about convincing you otherwise. Even though 3 Quebeccers have told you why, you still continue to be offended. Next time, if you insist on speaking French, just tell the other party that you want to practice your French.

[Dino]

[QUOTE BY= MadeInCanada] Marcarc, I've said it and I'll say it again. People vote for governments, not corporations. Ontario is currently _dying_ to vote anything else but Liberal. Jack Layton is too far left for the Golden Horseshoe and Stephen Harper is too far right. Perhaps if the CPC fielded a moderate, even from out of Quebec, the seats in Alberta + 1/2 Ontario + Rural Prairies is enough for form a majority. There isn't some east/west conspiracy here, it's just that the Conservative party has fielded leader after leader that don't allow it to expand outside it's narrow base of Alberta. <br /> <br /> I bet if the CPC fielded Jean Charest or Bernard Lord in the next federal election, the party would win over 100 seats. Canadians don't care about transfer payments, but they won't vote for someone who would have stood by GWB on Iraq, joined the Ballistic Missile Defence treaty, or brought the Bible closer to the Legislature. Yet time after time, the CPC fields this kind of candidate. Preston Manning, Stockwell Day, Stephen Harper. Get real!<br /> <br /> In 1984, Mulroney formed a West-Quebec alliance which allowed him to gain a majority with seats in the West and Quebec (Ontario was gravy). If any conservative steps up to the plate, there's no reason why we can't have a West-Ontario or a West-Quebec alliance. The reason Ontario and Quebec give the Liberals 120+ seats is the same reason the CPC could pick up a majority. <br /> <br /> But like I said, it isn't going to happen with all the George Bush juniors the party keeps offering up. The CPC needs a guy like Joe Clark, who can speak French and speak to all Canadians, not a "fellow" at the Frasier institute. <br /> <br /> As for your experiences concerning Quebec hospitality, it seems you're determined to believe that people spoke to you in English out of arrogance and not accomodation. There's nothing to be done about convincing you otherwise. Even though 3 Quebeccers have told you why, you still continue to be offended. Next time, if you insist on speaking French, just tell the other party that you want to practice your French. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> The NDP is too far left? They aren't far enough to the left in my opinion. <br /> <br /> Also I'm not surprised most PM's come from Quebec they are always bilingual and you need that if your going to be in charge of Canada. To me it doesn't matter were they come from as long as they are left wing.(It's been a REALLY long time since we've had a PM on the left.)]<br /> <br /> MadeinCanada what party do you support? I'm curious becuase when I read your posts I will have an idea of how you think.