AngryFrenchGuy

Separatists Pay Taxes Too

with 50 comments

Jean et Harper

Stephen Harper did not win a majority in the last federal election and guess who he blames?

Money and ethnic votes.

This is the conclusion we can reach from his decision to abolish the public funding of political parties and the unprecedented constitutional crisis that is resulting from it.

It’s absolutely true, by the way.  If it wasn’t for the Québécois, who insist on voting Bloc and Liberal, the Conservative party would have a comfortable majority in the House of Commons right now.  It’s also true that if it wasn’t for the taxpayer money these parties receive from the federal government, the Conservatives could have easily outspent both of them in the last election.

Harper is factually right just as Jacques Parizeau’s infamous “money and ethnic votes” comment was factually solid:  If it hadn’t been for the Anglo vote and federal money today Québec would be an independent country.  If it hadn’t been for the French vote and public funding of political parties, today Canada would be the Conservative beacon of the Western world.

” We, the taxpayers of Canada, are underwriting 86% of the expenses of a party whose sole raison d’etre is the destruction of the country. Let them work their treason on their own dime”, wrote Andrew Coyne on his Maclean’s blog about the Bloc québécois.  This is the party line that continues to be diligently copy/pasted by conservative pundits accross the country.

We, the taxpayers are also separatists, by the way.  Bloc voters pay taxes to Ottawa just the same as Conservative voters.  The Bloc’s 1,95$ per vote is our ‘own dime’, Andy.  It doesn’t matter if the Bloc gets 10%, 30%, 60% or 86% of it’s funding from the federal government.  They get their twoonie per vote the same as everybody else.  That twoonie comes out of it’s supporters pockets through their taxes.  Period.

Jacques Parizeau was straight out offensive in the way he blamed the referendum defeat on one segment of Québec’s population.  But Jacques Parizeau never called Anglos traitors.  He never said they had destroyed the country of Québec, even though a clear majority of Francophones had voted for independence.

He certainly never cut the funding of Anglo organizations and political parties, even after it became widely known they had illegally used millions of federal tax dollars to thwart the democratic expression of the will of the voters.

These are awfully dangerous times for English Canada to return to the Oka Crisis-style politics of ethnicity and Québec-bashing.  An economic meltdown.  A constitutional crisis.  And now a coordinated campaign by the Canadian Right to blame the whole thing on Canada’s historical scapegoat:  Québec.

Update: The Tories back down on the public financing of political parties but the Liberals are still talking coalition.

The Montreal Gazette, making itself useful for once, leaks Conservative talking points for talk radio enthusiasts: “Certainly not a single voter voted for the Liberals to form a coalition with the separatists in the Bloc.”

“There is simply no way Michaelle Jean can endorse a separatist-controlled coalition without triggering a crisis on the monarchy, never mind the Constitution.” – Don Martin, The Calgary Herald

“But we’re now faced with the real possibility that the Bloc Quebecois could have a seat around the cabinet table if opposition members topple the Conservative government next week and replace it with a coalition that includes Quebec separatists.” – Tom Brodbeck, Winnipeg Sun

Now the Governor-General cannot be trusted to do her job. Too French. “Ms. Jean was appointed by former Prime Minister Paul Martin. At the time of her appointment, she also held French citizenship, which she wisely renounced in the ensuing controversy. There was also considerable controversy over whether she and her spouse, Jean-Daniel Lafond, harboured separatist sympathies; in his case, few of those who know him believed the denials.” Norman Spector, the Globe and Mail

It has now become an all out separatist conspiracy!   Count how many times the Conservatives use the word separatist on their website: “The EFU was merely a trigger to execute a longstanding secret deal between the NDP and Quebec separatists.”

Yeah, I must be paranoid.  No one is trying to make this about Québec and the Bloc…

Written by angryfrenchguy

November 29, 2008 at 1:50 pm

50 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. AFG, very good article, couldn’t be better.

    Kriss

    November 29, 2008 at 2:00 pm

  2. Texte solide, belle relexion.

    jasmincormier

    November 29, 2008 at 2:19 pm

  3. “We, the taxpayers are also separatists, by the way. Bloc voters pay taxes to Ottawa just the same as Conservative voters. The Bloc’s 1,95$ per vote is our ‘own dime’, Andy. It doesn’t matter if the Bloc gets 10%, 30%, 60% or 86% of it’s funding from the federal government. They get their twoonie per vote the same as everybody else. That twoonie comes out of it’s supporters pockets through their taxes. Period.”

    You’re absolutely right.

    And one thing which NO party has been mentioning is this: The cuts to party funding disproportionately affects low-income voters.

    It’s not just about funding political parties, but about making contributions by their voters – their supporters – much more equitable.

    Chrystal Ocean

    November 29, 2008 at 2:59 pm

  4. Heh, Coyne answereth:

    “NICE TRY: One commenter takes me to task for singling out the Bloc’s subsidy for scorn. “Aren’t you being a little dishonest here?” he/she asks. “Separatists are actually funded with… separatists’ money simply because anyone who vote is actually choosing the political party that will receive his $1.95 per vote.”

    Um, no. The money comes from general revenues. There isn’t some income tax check-off whereby the individual taxpayer gets to decide who gets his money (though that would be an improvement on the current setup). It all comes from the taxpaying public as a whole.

    It’s true that the money is allocated by the decisions of Bloc voters, but that’s a different thing entirely. That the Bloc is helping itself to public funds via Bloc supporters does not alter the fact that a separatist party depends for almost the whole of its funding on the taxpayers of Canada.”

    Olivier

    November 29, 2008 at 3:18 pm

  5. c’est une image très bonne d’ailleurs

    The post was good too

    biffsdad

    November 29, 2008 at 3:28 pm

  6. “Um, no. The money comes from general revenues. There isn’t some income tax check-off whereby the individual taxpayer gets to decide who gets his money (though that would be an improvement on the current setup). It all comes from the taxpaying public as a whole.

    It’s true that the money is allocated by the decisions of Bloc voters, but that’s a different thing entirely. That the Bloc is helping itself to public funds via Bloc supporters does not alter the fact that a separatist party depends for almost the whole of its funding on the taxpayers of Canada.”

    Yeah, I read that. Is it just me or does it make no sense whatsoever? If anyone can explain how my separatist dollars are NOT going into the ‘general fund’ I’d like to understand.

    angryfrenchguy

    November 29, 2008 at 4:23 pm

  7. “These are awfully dangerous times for English Canada to return to the Oka Crisis-style politics of ethnicity and Québec-bashing. An economic meltdown. A constitutional crisis. And now a coordinated campaign by the Canadian Right to blame the whole thing on Canada’s historical scapegoat: Québec”

    Just how fucking paranoid are you? You know who else has a problem with this plan? The respresentatives of roughly 100 anglo ridings across the country. Of course, in your mind, it’s somehow all about Quebec.

    RoryBellows

    November 29, 2008 at 6:24 pm

  8. “He certainly never cut the funding of Anglo organizations and political parties, even after it became widely known they had illegally used millions of federal tax dollars to thwart the democratic expression of the will of the voters.”

    Please tell us all about how the practically defunct Equality party and Alliance Quebec “illegally used millions” during the referendum? And you have balls scapegoating? What were the name sof the people implicated in the sponsership scandal again?

    RoryBellows

    November 29, 2008 at 6:28 pm

  9. That should read “to bring up scapegoating”

    RoryBellows

    November 29, 2008 at 6:30 pm

  10. Rory, anybody with half a brain understands the plan is aimed at the Liberals. But the conservatives – party and media – can’t sell it by saying: “We absolutely need these 25 million dollars to save the economy” or “It’s really really important that we do this RIGHT NOW, it will bankrupt our only rivals, the Liberals!”. The only way they can make this important enough to risk their government over is making it about the Bloc.

    And if you’re going to have us believe the conservative media is not trying very, very hard to make it about the Bloc and that they will not try to destroy any potential coalition between the Liberals and the NDP by making it about the Bloc, you are doing the Canadian ostrich again.

    The federalists, Franco and Anglo did their deed in 1995 as part of the Liberal Party – PLC and PLQ – The EQ’s leader quit to ‘unite the federalists’ within the Liberal party. Option Canada and le Conseil de l’Unité Canadienne were creatures of the Liberal party.

    Who would fare better without corporate or public funds? Tough call, but I would think the PQ, with a project, a product, something, anything, to offer, would be better able to mobilize people and funds in the long run. But then, the stronger the PQ gets, the stronger the Liberals get. Ying begets Yang, the positive begets the negative, the Void begets the PQ…

    angryfrenchguy

    November 29, 2008 at 6:55 pm

  11. The separatists pay taxes but get 9 billion dollars a year on top of the budget to cover these taxes. Quebec separatists are the beggars. Give me money or I gonna separate.

    Geck

    November 29, 2008 at 7:09 pm

  12. You’re dead on AFG. The No side was driven by the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) with an ideology created and maintained by people with names like Trudeau, Chretien and Dion. Your accusation that millions were spent illegally is unfounded, but your implication that it was Anglo Montreal that was spending it is a flat out lie.

    The EP leader quit? Quit what? His party, (and I’m not even sure who we’re talking about here) had no power whatsoever in ’95. In any case, the EP supported the No side, is that supposed to be some kind of shocker? Who was in charge of option Canada? A guy named Jocelyn Beaudoin.

    There is no ethnic angle to this either, as much as you’d like there to be. All I see is a government looking to weaken their opponents under the guise of fiscal responsability. I hope it fails. The parties who would be most affected by this are the non-establishment parties, The NDP, the Greens and others. They are the ones that have the most to lose and they are virtually non-existent in Quebec.

    RoryBellows

    November 29, 2008 at 11:13 pm

  13. And the reason Parizeau never called us traitors is that in order to be a traitor you have to have been perceived as having been loyal at some point.

    RoryBellows

    November 29, 2008 at 11:16 pm

  14. Hey Ho RoryBellows,

    “Your accusation that millions were spent illegally is unfounded.”

    I have to get my hands on some of that federalist GHB. You can rape the constitution all night long and wake up in the morning feeling pure as a child, without a trace of memory…

    “your implication that it was Anglo Montreal that was spending it is a flat out lie”

    When did I ever say ONLY the Anglos spent illegal campaign money? The illegal federal money went to help the No campaign. Unless you federalists also had segregated campaigns, I’d say it was a team effort.

    angryfrenchguy

    November 30, 2008 at 12:00 am

  15. Rory:

    “And the reason Parizeau never called us traitors is that in order to be a traitor you have to have been perceived as having been loyal at some point.”

    Zing!

    That being said… AFG is loosing focus, I think, when he tries to draw a parallel with Parizeau. This whole discussion should, I think, really revolves around:

    A) The Bait™. That whole thing about Obama and whatnot is a bait, not for the Liberals, NDP or BQ. It’s a bait for the public, us. They are using a sordid, cynical trick to bully the opposition trough the use of The People™. It seems the opposition saw them coming; I may be wrong, but I can’t help but think that the CPC never, ever saw that one coming. Heh.

    B) What is The Media™ reaction to The Bait™. Obviously, Coyne is an interesting example. I am a fatalist; it is ok for pundits to call the BQ “traitors” and whatnot, it seems, so be it. But I think it will be interesting to see who is a coward and who isn’t. It’s easy to do so to a mostly non-québec audience. I’d like to see one of those try it in Québec, just for the sake of it… (Hint: The CPC tried something similar with that 350million$ truck…)

    C) How the Libs and NDP will handle The Kiss Of Death™, ie: support from the BQ. Harper may get the last laugh on that one. Time will tell. But AFG is right on a point: Harper’s gang are trying to turn that into good old separatist-bashing (not Québec-bashing: as long as we vote conservative and behave, they can call us a nation all night long, oh yeah baby! Just remember: there are good and bad quebecers. Just don’t hang around with the wrong crowd…).

    The only reason I can see is that, by doing so, they can at long last take the National Unity mantle from the Liberals… Would that be worth losing power? Of course not.

    Olivier

    November 30, 2008 at 12:26 am

  16. The facts are out to the public as to how this system works. In essence, the poor taxpayer is being forced to pay for political parties they don’t necessarily support(how democratic). The conservatives have done a great job in exposing the program as the one commentor here whom made reference to the media taking the bait on this issue. This has been a hot topic on radio talk shows, newspapers and television this past week.

    I think its rather hilarious that the opposition came across as they were going to bring the government down on the lack of a fiscal stimulation program. Ruse… Lets be realistic, this has nothing to do with stimulation and everything to do with greed and the lust for the taxpayers dollars by the political parties (exept for one who have the most to lose). Why shouldn’t these parties have to raise their own funds??

    On the other issues with regards to finger pointing at the separatists. Of course they would play this card in order to garner support for their plans…”you want your tax dollars going to the Bloc Quebecois” was the message. This is just politics and it has appeared to work quite well in most parts of the country. I am doubting this issue will go away, even with the Conservatives backing down on the issue…the cat is out of the bag.

    Question, Why did the BQ only generate funding of about 800K last year. Seems a bit low if 30% of Quebec is separatist as others have indicated. Assuming about 2.1 million in Quebec are separtist then per separitist, its about 38 cents per separatist. I would think if they really were commited to the cause the level of commitment would be substantially higher for their representative political party, or is it as usual, many in Quebec expect others to pay for the “party”.

    ABP

    ABP

    November 30, 2008 at 12:44 pm

  17. ABP:

    Dude, you’re late.

    Olivier

    November 30, 2008 at 1:01 pm

  18. Oh, and I’m eagerly awaiting Spector’s next column in Le Devoir. Hopefully he will explain those hard hitting truth to those who don’t read the Globe…

    Heh.

    Olivier

    November 30, 2008 at 2:01 pm

  19. Have you seen this latest screed from Norman Spector’s blog in the Globe? Mme Jean is a traitorous plant from the Martin government?! Have the Conservatives lost their minds! Here is the quote:

    ‘If Ms. Jean were to decide to hand power over to a Liberal-led coalition, Conservative voters would be furious. Western Canadians, in particular, would feel that the government had been stolen from them. Outside Québec, there would be strong resentment against a party dedicated to breaking up Canada having a role in governing the country.

    Ms. Jean was appointed by former Prime Minister Paul Martin. At the time of her appointment, she also held French citizenship, which she wisely renounced in the ensuing controversy. There was also considerable controversy over whether she and her spouse, Jean-Daniel Lafond, harboured separatist sympathies; in his case, few of those who know him believed the denials.’

    Outremontaise

    November 30, 2008 at 2:38 pm

  20. Man, Andrew Coyne is so all over it!

    http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/11/30/the-tories-made-them-do-it/

    “No. No, the sensible, restrained, pragmatic thing to do when threatened with the loss of subsidy is to take down the government. The sober, reasonable, moderate thing to do in this time of economic uncertainty is to provoke a constitutional crisis — to cobble together a coalition without a prime minister or a program, propped up by a separatist party, and demand the governor general call upon it to form a new government, replacing the old one we just elected. It’s been six weeks, after all.”

    Ye gods, and I tought only a referendum on separation leading to the destruction of the country (that’s how you say “Référendum portant sur l’indépendance du Québec” in english, right?) could make these guys foam at the mouth like that…

    The MacLean’s bloggers are having a field day, that’s for sure…

    Olivier

    November 30, 2008 at 8:01 pm

  21. Québec’s independence was not on anyones agenda, least of all on the PQ’s, Gilles Duceppe was waiting for an opportunity to make a graceful exit out of Ottawa and bam! he wake up one morning to find out he’s the brain behind a socialist-separatist coalition getting ready to overthrow the government.

    See? Nothing will change in Canada after Québec’s independence. You guys are perfectly able to cook up these periodic constitutional crisis all by yourselves…

    angryfrenchguy

    November 30, 2008 at 9:52 pm

  22. AFG,

    great post. I hope you posted this to his blog.

    I am shocked and glad that you are defending Parizeau’s “money and the ethnic vote. Not long ago you despised him for precisely that.

    Andrew Coyne is a real piece of work. He is a WASP flag-waver for an Anglosphere world. He is always hostile towards Quebec.

    This is a guy who, on the eve of the 1995 referendum, called on Chrétien to ignore the referendum results if the YES won.

    This is a guy who doesn’t think much of the fact that Quebec did not sign the Constitution because he states that Quebec is well represented by Trudeau’s Liberal Party of Canada which got 74 out of 75 Quebec seats at the time. He fails to consider the fact that these seats were won in 1980 before the Constitution talks, which means that Trudeau could not claim to represent Quebec in the Constitution talks because he didn’t receive a mandate for it.

    This is a guy hostile to any form of recognition of Quebec as a nation. He says that it is a myth that Quebec is one of the founding people of Canada because Quebec as a concept was created by Confederation. He clearly ignores the history of the Quebec before Confederation such as when it existed as Lower Canada and so on.

    This is a guy that is for proportional representation. I suspect he is for that because it would reduce Quebec and the Bloc’s influence in Parliament. The fact that he applauds Harper’s cuts to party financing because it would harm the Bloc québécois reinforces my suspicions.

    I could go on. I can’t stand Coyne and English Canada that takes him seriously.

    Antonio

    November 30, 2008 at 10:09 pm

  23. the country continues to drift to the right. and most people who vote for conservatives are idealogically opposed to a tax payer funded entitlement program for politicians. one would think that in tough economic times – a little belt tightening would be received by parliament in an overwhelmingly positive manner. the conservatives were willing to give up 10 million and for this they are looking at the possibility of another 300 million dollar election?

    go ahead and bash andrew coyne – and cheer for a constitutional crisis? guess what – it’s not going to happen… the libs , the left and the independantistes have been played like a piano. and the electorate is now able to see the opposition in the cold light of day.

    believe it or not, the minority government in ottawa is run by conservatives duly elected just two months ago. now the repeal of the subsidy is off the table, and right-to-strike went the same way – – – is the opposition going to vote against a measure designed to protect retirees in this crunch and bring down the government?

    just imagine the ads that will be aired in the next election. well-heeled politicians ready to throw the country into a crisis because they couldn’t fundraise themselves out of a paper bag. (in truth – the ndp aren’t doing so shabby)

    would you vote for someone who wouldn’t wait five, six or seven weeks for a stimulus package because his or her welfare was being cut off? if you like your democracy and your candidate – try stepping up to the plate and writing a cheque. the limit is now $1,100.00

    i like the idea of a strong and independant canada. blowing money irresponsibly out the doors is certainly not the way to achieve that. besides, conservatives could do more for quebec in 4 years than the bloc has done since they crossed the floor and decided to go it alone.

    some things never change – isn’t it true that politics makes for strange bedfellows?

    jack and gilles went up the hill
    to fetch a pail of water.
    jack fell down and broke his crown
    and gilles came tumbling after.

    attache ta toque.

    johnnyonline

    November 30, 2008 at 11:06 pm

  24. johnnyonline:
    are you talking about another electoral campaign?
    Do I miss something here?

    Kriss

    December 1, 2008 at 12:55 am

  25. Antonio:

    “Jacques Parizeau was straight out offensive in the way he blamed the referendum defeat on one segment of Québec’s population. But Jacques Parizeau never called Anglos traitors. He never said they had destroyed the country of Québec, even though a clear majority of Francophones had voted for independence.”

    Straight out offensive. Some defense, yeah…

    Olivier

    December 1, 2008 at 2:04 am

  26. i’m not interested in another election and i doubt anyone posting here is either.

    i would hate to see 300 million go out on another election – but it would be a small price to pay compared to the staggering sums blown out the doors and wasted by an undisciplined group of “entitled” politicians pretending to know what’s best for the country.

    do you want an another election?

    wait until the prime minister re-introduces the repeal of the $1.95 per vote subsidy in a more reasonable fashion – all on its own. watch how many canadians struggling with mortgages vote for the liberals, ndp and bloc when they see politicians unwilling to make a sacrifice to their feathered nests? do i hear the sound of a silent toilet flushing in the background?

    watch how many canadians will vote for liberals who have given up the middle ground to move left into the arms of the socialists. watch how many canadians vote for an ndp that has cultivated an alliance with the bloc. watch carefully how the conservatives will slide into the space abandoned by the liberals and then whip jack layton with some red rag.

    the country needs a steady hand right now – not some goofy political intrigue – but hey, if the opposition wants to go for it – why not?

    btw, the last minority coalition government back in the 1920’s lasted several months. that’s something to think about when you consider that the liberals don’t even have a leader in december 2008.

    johnnyonline

    December 1, 2008 at 2:15 am

  27. The Canadian political system 101: As the leader of the party with the most seats, Stephen Harper has, as per TRADITION, first dibs on the Primeministerhip.

    Constitutionally, the Queen and the GG can ask whomever they want to form a government. They could ask André Arthur to form the government if he could get a coalition together.

    By the way. Libs+NDP+Bloc = 54% of the votes. Conservatives = 37%

    That said I doubt it’s going to happen. My 10$ says Stephnen shuts down Parliament until after Christmas.

    angryfrenchguy

    December 1, 2008 at 8:44 am

  28. The representant of the queen have the right to refuse to shut down the session if she considers than paralysing the state at that time is not appropriate, because the economic crisis..

    midnightjack

    December 1, 2008 at 7:03 pm

  29. Western canadians who voted conservative don’t like Quebec, separatists, Duceppe, bilinguim, french, Kyoto, perequation, subsides, gun register, taxes, kindergarnen subsides, gay marriage, secularism, and Stephane Dion..It will be a new session of quebec bashing..

    midnightjack

    December 1, 2008 at 7:34 pm

  30. ..and i forgot women’s right and abortion..

    midnightjack

    December 1, 2008 at 7:55 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: