Politic?

This is a blog dedicated to a personal interpretation of political news of the day. I attempt to be as knowledgeable as possible before commenting and committing my thoughts to a day's communication.

Tuesday, April 01, 2014

Playing It Cool

"Our political party has always respected the law on political party financing, as has my husband."
Parti Quebecois Leader, Quebec Premier Pauline Marois

"We know right away that we have a project that is illegal. We know we have a project that will not pass the test of the courts."
"It is a totally artificial crisis fabricated with the sole aim of dividing people and propelling their agenda."
"It's a very significant legal tool, so the remedy has to be proportionate with the problem ... In the case of the PQ charter, there is not a single [piece of] evidence that there is any problem."
Liberal Leader Philippe Couillard

"Freedom of religion is a fundamental universal value inscribed in our constitution. And this government will defend it vigorously. If the Department of Justice deems that a law is unconstitutional, we would challenge such a law."
Employment Minister Jason Kenney, Canada
Once again, Premier Marois denies corruption within the Parti Quebecois. More, she denies that her wealthy businessman husband has ever been involved in shady dealings. Oh, and that she could be bought, despite Radio-Canada airing a report alleging fundraising irregularities in her 2007 campaign for the leadership of the PQ. A sworn statement [by an unnamed source] with an engineering firm was the source.

Claiming, under oath, that Claude Blanchet, Ms. Marois' husband, sought funding in the amount of a $25,000 donation from an engineering firm to advance her leadership bid. The PQ's own internal rules forbade donations that exceed $3,000, and none were to come from corporate entities, just from individuals. In his statement the source claimed he provided Mr. Blanchet with an envelope containing $25,000 representing individual donations to the value of $3,000 each.

It was a donation on behalf of his engineering firm that proved, he claimed, to be useful. The donation was made for the purpose of gaining "privileged access" to Ms. Marois. And in his testimony the source insisted that the $25,000 donation requested by Ms. Marois's husband, did indeed enable him to enjoy the access that had been promoted. But no corruption in the PQ, and none could ever touch the unassailable Premier Marois.

Ms. Marois does, in fact, have more than enough on her plate for the moment, leading up to the April 7 vote. The referendum bugbear has taken up more of her time than she bargained for, and has resulted in the humiliation of seeing her polled lead evaporating. But this has left her with the invaluable resurrection of the Quebec charter of values, approved by a majority of francophones that would prohibit public-sector workers from wearing 'conspicuous' religious symbols on the job.

Mind, that would result in secular, inviting, equality-minded Quebec not only hammering non-francophone Quebecers with the French-language-primacy issue, but the issue of religions freedom being infringed upon. A mere trifle, for the sake of unity and secular harmony, minus the purging of thousands of observant Jews, Muslims and Sikhs from the ranks of the public service; religious minorities, beware should you not wish to renounce the symbols of your faith.

Groups within Quebec, including the provincial human rights commission, claim the values charter is unconstitutional. No worry; Ms. Marois chirpily stated her intention to invoke the notwithstanding clause, reserved for special cases, which would give her charter a five-year-breathing room status. According to Benoit Pelletier, professor of law at University of Ottawa, former Liberal minister of intergovernmental affairs, use of the notwithstanding clause:
"Often carries a political price. It limits individual rights to respond to collective needs or collective interests"; there is no problem inherent in the instance of the values charter that would require such drastic action.
And should the federal government choose to become involved, to protect the interests of religious minorities in Quebec, according to the Canadian Constitution that would clearly represent an interference in the affairs of La Belle Province and anger Quebecers, enabling the Parti Quebecois to prepare the populace once again in their state of pique ... for the reintroduction of the referendum on separation.

Labels: , , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

() Follow @rheytah Tweet