Sunday, May 18, 2008

For the sake of clarity...

...if Stephen Harper and the Conservatives truly want to lay claim to the authorship and inspiration for the Clarity Act, then I think a massive ad campaign in the Quebec media is the way to go. I'd gladly chip-in $50 towards a full-page Conservative ad in La Presse affirming Stephen Harper as the true father of the Clarity Act, so Quebecers can at last know the truth. What'dya say, Steve? Frankly, I don't know why Harper hasn't been on the husitngs already in Quebec, going door to door if necessary, trying to correct this injustice of history...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

9 comments:

calgarygrit said...

Shhhh....don't tell Chantal Hebert...

Steve V said...

"I'd gladly chip-in $50 towards a full-page Conservative ad in La Presse affirming Stephen Harper as the true father of the Clarity Act, so Quebecers can at last know the truth."

I see rats.

RayK said...

How about just referencing the Quebec referendum bill he actually did author, the wonderfully named "Quebec Contingency Act".

That made separation subject to "approval [by] the rest of Canada by referendum."

I'm sure it would have gone over well having the other nine provinces--without Quebec--holding a referendum on whether Quebec should be allowed to declare independence.

RayK said...

Link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_Contingency_Act

Loraine Lamontagne said...

I remind Harper and the Reform party planted the seed for the Clarity Act. But thank God Dion came along. Harper's bill pertained strictly to Quebec, indeed it was highly discriminatory against Quebecers, while the Clarity Act addresses the situation of any Canadian province wanting out. The Contingency Act mandated that a referendum on the partition of Quebec be hald on the same day as the referendum on its participation in the Canadian federation. Indeed the only support the Reform Party had in Quebec at that time was with partitionists. The Contingency Act would have had the Canadian foreign affairs minister travel around the world to convince other countries to disregard Quebecers' democratic choice.

I remind Quebecers every time I have the opportunity to do so of Harper's C-341. They are usually unaware of it or have a vague memory of the partition part, but they usually think that it was Dion who wanted to partition Quebec. This is a situation that needs to be clarified. Journalists in Quebec must ask Harper if he would use the strategy he conceived and proposed in C-341 - he may have changed his mind. It's up to Harper to confirm.

Harper's C-341 is a perfect example of a highly discriminatory, dangerously flawed, ill-conceived and badly written proposed legislation. It should be in the textbooks on how not to write legislation. Mind you, most, if not all, of his legislation are written in that fashion.

unbelievable said...

To Loraine Lamontagne: I agree with everything you've said. I can't stand the stupidly named bills they draft as well as the way they are written...

Jason Hickman said...

I think the Libs could come up with better ways to use any spare change that they manage to scrape together these days, especially in Quebec.

Then again, Chretien *gained* seats post-Clarity Act, if memory serves, so on second thought, go right ahead with your ad buy.

Northern PoV said...

Great post and thread.
LL, thanks for the detail on C341.

Maybe we could re-run the reform ad that showed Quebec politicians with red slashed circles over their faces.

Antonio said...

you mean if you're not in government, you dont credit for taking action because you cant take action?

someone please pass this memo to Jack! Layton

As for the ad, I would totally go for an ad...

"Did you think the Clarity was bad? Take a look at Stephen Harper's version"

I understand the argument back in the day among liberal circles was whether or not it was necessary.

10 years later, I think it is unanimous that it has weakened the sovereigntist movement, forcing them to play fair.

Every poll with a clear question has always shown stronger support for federalism