Liberals to sell off Hydro-Quebec?

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Liberals to sell off Hydro-Quebec?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NorthReport

I suppose these things have to be considered when you don't address your debt issues, but why don't they just redistribute the wealth more, and keep essential serrvices in the public's hands. 

All the more reason to run a federalist left of centre party that can get the support of voters next election. 

Quebec economists suggest selling part of Hydro-Quebec and the SAQ

http://globalnews.ca/news/1292275/quebec-economists-suggest-selling-hydr...

PrairieDemocrat15

The Liberals have no madate for deep cuts or privatizing crown corporations, even just a minority stake. If Couillard would have proposed those measures during the campaign, there is no way he would have won.

NorthReport

There is no way the Liberals should have won the last election with the construction scandal swirlling around their heads.

Liberals won won because Quebecers were desperate for a federalist option,  and the Liberals talked talked about jobs and the economy.

All the more reason to get the QNPD off the ground in Quebec.

 

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

People who identify as "federalist" in Quebec are pretty much priviliged and right-wing.  A left party that's neutral on the constitution can win(and that's probably the stance the QNPD will take)but not one that is dismissively anti-sovereigntist.

No party that waves the Maple Leaf will EVER be popular in Quebec.   Neutrality is enough. The only way the left can get electability-level support is to put together a party that gets whatever left-federalists there may be(mainly these will be from ethnic communities...francophone left-federalists basically don't exist)and the large group of left-sovereigntists that will be bolting the PQ in disgust after PKP takes over the leadership.

That's just reality, North.  It's not possible to build an electable left by telling Quebec to "get over it".

NorthReport

I'm not buying the kool-aid Ken but thanks anyways

lagatta

No, you aren't, and you get your jollies telling us whom to be. What was it Brecht said about the East German government wanting to elect another people?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

God forbid you should end up in charge of the NDP's Quebec strategy, North.  They'd end up with the same federal results they had there in 1962, 1963, 1965, 1988, 1993, 1997, and 2001.

Calling for a "left-of-center federalist party" in Quebec is like calling for a left-of-center Pro-Britain Catholic party in Northern Ireland, a left-of-center pro-Castillian party in Catalonia, or a left-of-center pro-settler party for FN leadership elections.

Would you please listen to people like Lagatta and Unionist? They actually live in Quebec.   They represent the voice of the left in Quebec in many respects.  They know what they're talking about.

 

Unionist

Why are you people enabling this spammer? Let this thread die, please.

 

NorthReport

Sorry Ken but  that is nonsense.

And that approach has been the Quebec strategy for way too long and look at the recent Quebec election results now.

My hunch is perhaps it is time to start listening to some others as well.

NorthReport

Ken means well but is uninformed

---------------------------------------------------

Unionist

You have bot the kool-aid, lock, stock, and barrel.

You should proactice what you preach don't you think?

You come up with stupidities such as if someone is not actually living in Quebec they have no right to comment on Quebec politics.

Wow, what a great open society that is. What are you afraid of?

It does not matter where someone is from - they have as much right to comment on any subject anywhere, no matter where they live, what langauage they speak, or what is the colour of their skin.

You constantly comment on issues in other areas outside Quebec which is quite healthy.

Please try looking in the mirror and be consistent with your behavior.

 

 

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:
No party that waves the Maple Leaf will EVER be popular in Quebec.   Neutrality is enough. The only way the left can get electability-level support is to put together a party that gets whatever left-federalists there may be(mainly these will be from ethnic communities...francophone left-federalists basically don't exist)and the large group of left-sovereigntists that will be bolting the PQ in disgust after PKP takes over the leadership.

Then how do you explain the successful campaigns of Francoise Boivin and Nycole Tyrmel across the river from Ottawa in one of the most federalist regions of the province?

I'm not sure I follow the logic of your question, A24. But sticking with the topic of this thread, clearly Françoise Boivin and Nycole Turmel were successful because they convinced the voters that they would not sell off Hydro, right? Hydro-Québec, Hydro-Ontario... Hydro-Canada!

Water we talking about anyway?

 

NorthReport

It would be a shame if the greedy right-wingers were able get their hands on Hydro-Quebec.

Hopefully Quebecers will loudly oppoae this idea to sell off Hydro-Quebec.

The nationalization of electricity

http://www.hydroelectricite.ca/en/the-nationalization-of-electricity.php

Aristotleded24

Ken Burch wrote:
No party that waves the Maple Leaf will EVER be popular in Quebec.   Neutrality is enough. The only way the left can get electability-level support is to put together a party that gets whatever left-federalists there may be(mainly these will be from ethnic communities...francophone left-federalists basically don't exist)and the large group of left-sovereigntists that will be bolting the PQ in disgust after PKP takes over the leadership.

Then how do you explain the successful campaigns of Francoise Boivin and Nycole Turmel across the river from Ottawa in one of the most federalist regions of the province?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

They will.   And sovereigntists will fight on that issue just as hard as the tiny group of francophone left-federalists will.  QS will be on the front lines...will your "left of center federalist party" be there?

And really, your anger should be aimed at whoever decided NOT to form a QNPD prior to this election.   By your logic, that's all that should have been needed to prevent the Hydro-Quebec selloff.

You should also be mad at Tom Mulcair, who helped the pro-selloff party win a seat(if that MNA doesn't break with the PLQ whip, btw, he has no right to claim to have "a history with the NDP").

And it's fine to comment, but not to insult people(you claim that I'M uninformed?  What magical information do you have out in B.C.)?

And not to act like you know more about Quebec than Unionist, who actually lives there, does.   Or that Lagatta does.   Why do you refuse to listen to what they've been telling you?

The PQ ended up being a horrible right-wing party.   But sovereigntism doesn't begin and end with the PQ, and it can't be progressive to wage a hate campaign against ALL sovereigntists the way you do.   Their views were shaped by their experience as victims of colonial oppression...something YOU, as an anglo white guy, have no experience of.  You might as well tell FN's that they should have been happy to have their kids shipped off to the government school and their lands taken.

Identity matters just as much as class, and conditions class.

 

NorthReport

Ken,

Please relax.

Most of us were hoping for a good QS showing.

I would have preferred a large number of left-of-centre members elected, and a minority government.

And I'm sure the election result is not the result you wanted.

Unfortunately that did not happen, and it is time for us to take our heads out of the sand.

There was no federalist left-of centre alternative for the voters, so federalists voted for the corrupt scandal-ridden right-wing Liberals - why else would so many have voted for them?  

Perhaps you prefer to beat your head against a brick wall, but I don't.

There is is a fundamental political problem in Quebec, it needs to be addressed, and anyone has as much right to comment on Quebec politics as anyone else.

Please explain why you are so afraid of having a federalist- left-of-centre party running in Quebec?  

And who cares if it is connected to the NPD.

Do you really think the left-of-centre in Quebec, who had a golden opportunity politically, have a clue what they are doing, with results like we have just had?

It's not personal, I like legatta and Unionist, but sorry they are out to lunch with their assessment of the political situation in Quebec.

I'm surprised though as your comments are bordering on being anti-democratic.

-------------------------

Unrelated to you Ken

And the only spam here is Unionist's comments, who just cannot handle discussing the holy grail of Quebec politics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The elections in 1962, 1963, 1965, 1968, 1972, 1974, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1993, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2006, and 2008 prove that a "left of center federalist party" will never have traction in Quebec.  The NDP ONLY did well in 2011 in Quebec because it backed pff from hard-line federalism and let its candidates follow their consccience and the natural views of the ridings the stood in.  If they'd run the kind of Fuck Sovereignty/God Save The Queen" campaign you want the QNDP to run(the kind we both knowq they won't), they'd have been shut out again.  Quebec is different and will always be  different.

I'm not afraid of a "federalist left of center party" for Quebec.  If Quebecers start one that's their call.  If I lived and voted there and that was the most electable anti-PLQ party in my riding I'd most likely vote for it..  But they don't seem to be super eager to do that.  Doesn't that tell you something? Doesn't the total failure of the Quebec Greens. who ARE a "left of center federalist party" in the last election tell you anything?  Doesn't the complete lack of any polling information showing a strong possible showing tell you anything?  

Let me ask you this:  Why are YOU afraid of a left of center party that's agnostic on the constitutional issue?  A party that may not be all-out federalist or all-out sovereigntist but puts the social justice agenda before the issue of which flag is flying?  It's going to be much easier to build that sort of party than the one you want, so why not advocate that?  And why do you hate sovereigntism(as opposed to the PQ, a party that does deserve hatred) with such a passion?  It's not like a large Maple Leaf-waving and anglocentric Left ever had any possibility of emerging in Quebec...the conditions never existed for it.

Support for independence and another referendum has cratered in Quebec at the moment...but it can always come surging back.  And the best way to make it comew back, to revive the PQ AND the BQ, is for federalists like yourself to keep demanding that soverigntism be crushed and those who back it philosophically to be made to renounce it.  You are helping people like PKP and his ilk by banging your essentially royalist and neocolonial drum.  If you want to stop the sovereigntists, don't do them favors like that.

You have the right to comment, but be careful how you sound.  It's not as though you know more about Quebec than the  Quebec residents who post here.   They live Quebec...you and I just read about it. 

Aristotleded24

Ken Burch wrote:
The elections in 1962, 1963, 1965, 1968, 1972, 1974, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1993, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2006, and 2008 prove that a "left of center federalist party" will never have traction in Quebec.

That also proves that the NDP can never win a federal election. Oh wait....

History does inform, but things also change. And the Sherbrooke Declaration was passed by the NDP in 2006, so they had exactly the same position in the 2008 and the 2011 elections. There were other factors besides the constitutional issues that explained the Quebec breakthrough in 2011.

Ken Burch wrote:
Doesn't the total failure of the Quebec Greens. who ARE a "left of center federalist party" in the last election tell you anything?  Doesn't the complete lack of any polling information showing a strong possible showing tell you anything?

The Green brand is not particularly strong in Quebec because of the weakness of the Green Party generally, and again, it doesn't boil down to constitutional issues. They are at a small disadvantage of having no concentrated base of support, no infrastructure for organizing, and next to no media coverage.

Ken Burch wrote:
Why are YOU afraid of a left of center party that's agnostic on the constitutional issue?  A party that may not be all-out federalist or all-out sovereigntist but puts the social justice agenda before the issue of which flag is flying?  It's going to be much easier to build that sort of party than the one you want, so why not advocate that?

I'd support such a party if it existed, but which party can that be? It certainly isn't Quebec Solidaire. Stockholm contended that David tried to out-flank the PQ on this issue, especially during the debates, and I heard David say, in her concession speech, that she was as dedicated to the sovereignty project as ever, and individual protestations that the candidates focussed on other issues (which I believe) are not enough to counter that.

Ken Burch wrote:
Support for independence and another referendum has cratered in Quebec at the moment...but it can always come surging back.  And the best way to make it comew back, to revive the PQ AND the BQ, is for federalists like yourself to keep demanding that soverigntism be crushed and those who back it philosophically to be made to renounce it.  You are helping people like PKP and his ilk by banging your essentially royalist and neocolonial drum.  If you want to stop the sovereigntists, don't do them favors like that.

I agree, however I don't always feel that same respect reflected when I read some sovereigntist authors, for example Pierre Beaudet. I do not feel well-represented when they talk about a mythical "rest-of-Canada," as if New Brunsiwck is the same as Saskatchewan is the same as Thunder Bay is the same as Vancouver is the same as Inuvik. I have also seen analysis that it is impossible for Quebec to have a socialist state within the Canadian structure. This not only neglects that Quebec is the only province to run its own pension plan, but that socialist governments ran Saskatchewan from 1944 to 1964, and depending on your definition of socialism, ran Saskatchewan again from 1971 to 1982, BC from 1972 to 1975, and Mannitoba from 1969 to 1973 and again from 1981 to 1988. But in the main, the intensity over constitutional issues is not there, and it would be nice if the media and political elites in this country recognized that.

NorthReport

Five myths about Quebec anglophones 

Francophones must confront the myths they have about anglophones if we are ever to better understand each other

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Opinion+Five+myths+about+Quebec+angl...

NorthReport

Ken,

And Rush Limbaugh lives in the USA so we should all listen to him, eh! Wink

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Not about Quebec.  Or about anything else.  But Rush has nothing in common with Unionist.