My Dear Michaelle Jean

18 Replies to “My Dear Michaelle Jean”

1. What will the Liberanos think of next to slap the West in the face . . . . appointing a pro-independance French citizen to rule over us.
   Time to pack up the stuff & go.
   Lieberals . . hate the bastards

2. Hard to believe, but there was no mention by M. Rose of the sacrifices made by the murdered M.Laporte and his family.

3. LA MANI�RE QU�B�COISE?
   August 17, 2005
   by Paul Matthews
   The country, it appears, wants to like Governor General-designate Micha�lle Jean. That said, when images from her husband�s film La mani�re n�gre began circulating, showing a younger prospective GG toasting the independence of Haiti, Martinique and Quebec, more than a few feathers started to ruffle. There she was, our polyglot poster child for the �new Canada,� sitting next to prominent separatists with shady pasts. And her husband! John Ralston Saul�s books may have been wacky, but one of Lafond�s books has him saying he would �applaud� Quebec independence �with both hands.� Since Jean apparently deems it �not astute� to speak before she is sworn in on September 27, navigating the issue was left to PMO Communications Director Scott Reid. Yesterday, he declared Lafond was �not a separatist, nor has he ever been a participant or a militant in the sovereignist movement.� Reid�s statements deliberately steered clear of whether Lafond was a sympathizer or whether Jean�s comments could land her into trouble.
   Where Reid was guarded, others haven�t been. Stephen Harper went on CFRA Ottawa yesterday, alleging Paul Martin gave him a personal guarantee Jean was a strong federalist. The Post quotes Conservative senator Marjorie LeBreton, who seizes on statements made by the prime minister�s principal secretary H�l�ne Scherrer about the speed of Jean�s appointment, and argues that the Martin camp did not display due dilligence. Andrew Coyne argues a similar line, saying the appointment makes a mockery of the Governor General�s position. While the call to investigate how the GG is appointed is helpful, Coyne�s overly dramatic squawking isn�t. The Globe runs an op-ed piece from La Presse editor-in-chief Andr� Pratte, which warns that forcing Jean to confess how she voted in the 1995 referendum will set a dangerous precedent as well as fuel separatist feelings in Quebec. As Pratte reminds us, Jean never used her public persona to sway voters one way or the other; instead, she was a young journalist in the post-Meech-and-Charlottetown early nineties. Until the facts are in, there�s no need to scream for heads. That said, as John Ibbitson argues, this should be the last GG the PMO appoints.
   http://maisonneuve.org/blog/index.php?itemid=1107

4. La Maniere Negre: Jean participated in this film?
   What does “participated” mean? Canadians expect to have an answer to this question and others, PM Martin.
   Extract from:
   Appointment of new Governor General
   August 4, 2005
   Ottawa, Ontario
   August 04, 2005: Prime Minister Paul Martin announces Ms. Michaelle Jean as the 27th Governor General of Canada on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. Photo by Dave Chan – PMO
   Prime Minister Paul Martin announced today that, on his recommendation, Her Majesty the Queen is pleased to approve the appointment of Ms. Micha�lle Jean as the 27th Governor General of Canada. Ms. Jean will serve in succession to the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson.
   The installation of Ms. Jean as Governor General will occur on September 27, 2005 in the Senate Chamber.
   Biographies are attached.
   In the mid-1990s, Micha�lle Jean also participated in a number of documentary films produced by her husband, filmmaker Jean-Daniel Lafond: La mani�re n�gre ou Aim� C�saire chemin faisant, Tropique Nord, Ha�ti dans tous nos r�ves, and L�heure de Cuba. These thought-provoking documentaries were critically acclaimed and earned awards both in Canada and internationally
   http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news.asp?id=558

5. doesn’t “critically acclaimed” usually mean nobody watched it? I wonder if Mr. GG elect is going to see an increase in royalties because of all this interest…

6. Paul Martin gave notice in 1995: The Revolution Is Here and PM Martin is the Hero.
   The revolution is complete in 2005: Jean is the Queen of Canada: Vive le Canada; Dieu Sauve La Reine Jean.>>>
   BTW:Martin, 1995:”Westerners are seeking new flexibility. Ontario wants drastic reforms. The Atlantic provinces are tired of being dependent.”
   http://www.fin.gc.ca/news95/95-084e.html
   Excerpt:
   Montreal, October 20, 1995
   1995-084
   Notes for an address by Paul Martin, Minister of Finance, to the Quebec Lawyers and Notaries for the No
   Montreal, Quebec
   October 20, 1995
   Delivered text is official version
   In less than five years, we Quebecers will leave one century behind and begin a new one, the first in the third millennium.
   Will that century, like the one behind us, be marked by growth and economic security for Quebec? Or will we witness the disintegration of the country we have built together, Canada – the real stakes in this referendum?
   The choice we make ten days from now will determine that future. A future that rests in our hands.
   It is a choice that we faced once before, nearly a generation ago, and together we made the right decision.
   But this time, the stakes are even more important.
   This time, given the separatist plan, there would be no second vote, no second chance. A vote to separate from Canada would be irrevocable. Quebec would split from Canada.
   But there is another reason why this time the stakes are higher.
   The world has changed.
   Today’s world is one of unprecedented challenge. As all of you know, our prosperity, which once seemed guaranteed, now comes hard won, at the price of constant effort.
   Countries which only 15 years ago had economies that barely registered, are increasingly becoming serious competitors. They compete with us in the hunt for investment, in the pursuit of markets, and to create jobs.
   More than ever, we are measured not on our past performance – or the performance of our neighbours – but against the very best the world has to offer.
   But if the economic realities confronting Quebec today are more daunting than ever, they also offer great opportunities. In this new world – of challenge and opportunity – we literally cannot afford to make the wrong choice.
   That is why Jacques Parizeau and Lucien Bouchard can no longer continue to dodge the real issues in this debate. The burden of proof rests with them.
   We have already explained why it is not in the interests of the rest of Canada to establish an economic union with the separate Quebec. The premiers of the other provinces have underscored this same message. We also explained the risks involved in reopening NAFTA.
   The separatist leaders have issued no credible response. They have a moral obligation to do this for Quebecers before it is too late.
   So, Mr. Parizeau and Mr. Bouchard, tell us: after dismantling Canada, what magic trick will you use to produce the glowing picture you have painted for the people of Quebec?
   Without an economic union, without NAFTA, please explain what magic trick you plan to use to prevent our Quebec exporters from being overrun by the North American competitors? You have to tell us. The burden of proof is on you!
   Mr. Parizeau, Mr. Bouchard, under these circumstances, what magic trick will protect Quebec farmers and dairy producers, our film and television producers.
   What magic trick will you use to protect the industrial and regional development policies that are so important to our economy? You have to tell us. The burden of proof is on you!
   What about the issue of monetary union? Jacques Parizeau said in 1991, and I quote: “Creating a Quebec currency is not very complicated, but making sure ahead of time that people have confidence in that currency is another matter altogether. What is the best way of gaining their confidence? To tell them that we are going to keep the Canadian dollar, even if Canadians do not want us to do so.”
   Barely five days ago, Lucien Bouchard said, and I quote: “We will control our own money; we will manage our own money.”
   Doesn’t this contradict what they agreed upon on June 12? Doesn’t this contradict their assurances that Quebecers will always have the security of the Canadian dollar rather than the unknown quality of the Quebec dollar?
   Messrs. Parizeau and Bouchard: what magic trick will you use to reconcile these opposites? You have to tell us. The burden of proof is on you!
   Consider the issue of international influence. Canada is a member of the most powerful decision making organisations on the planet – the organisations that make all the important economic decisions. These include the G-7 and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, the fastest growing region of the globe. I sit on the Finance Ministers’ Committee for both of these groups. And I know just how important they are.
   Mr. Parizeau and Mr. Bouchard, if you leave Canada, what magic trick will let Quebec preserve this influence, which is so important to our economic development? You have to tell us. The burden of proof is on you!
   Now, about the debt and the deficit. To begin with, the separatists will have to take into account that Quebec is one of the most heavily taxed and indebted provinces in Canada. They must factor in the enormous costs involved in setting up a new state. They must also take into account that all credible economists agree that the deficit of a separate Quebec would be two to four times higher than it is now.
   As the Minister of Finance for Canada, I have no intention of glossing over my own problems. But I do know that in 1996-97, the Canadian government’s deficit-to-GDP ratio will be one of the lowest among all the G-7 countries. And I also know that for a separate Quebec, this deficit-to-GDP ratio would be one of the highest among developed countries. Mr. Parizeau, Mr. Bouchard, you have to tell us. The burden of proof is on you.
   What is the use of creating a new state if the state can be used only to pay its debts?
   As we can see, the burden of proof that separatists have to shoulder is immense. And it is impossible for them to give us this proof.
   Why? Because what they are proposing runs contrary to the evolution of today’s global economy. But anyway, the economy is not high on their list of priorities. That must be why Bernard Landry said earlier this week, and I quote: “People do not become sovereign for economic reasons.”
   I’m sorry, but the economy is very important indeed. Behind the figures are real people.
   What kind of vision is that for Quebec workers, Quebec families and Quebec youth?
   Let’s be clear on every issue, a vote for separation is a vote to step backwards. To step backwards on trade. To step backwards on debt. To step backwards on the deficit. To step backwards on taxes and interest rates. To step backwards on jobs, on growth.
   Making the separatist economy a success would take more than magic – it would take the ability to walk on water. We believe that Quebec deserves better than that – much better – that we deserve to ride the wave of change, nothing less. And that’s why we must vote no!
   A “No” vote will mean that we, Quebecers and Canadians, will be able to dedicate all our energies to the issues that really matter to us in our every day lives.
   Quebec will be able to join forces with the other governments in Canada to create a climate that is conducive to employment, to join them in the unprecedented effort already underway to restore health to our public finances. That is not a step backward. That is progress and genuine change.
   With the threat of separation lifted, Quebec, with Canada, can look forward to lower interest rates, which will mean jobs, investment and growth. That is not a step backward. That is progress and genuine change.
   Quebecers will be able to work together with Canadians in forging new trade agreements abroad, well beyond the foundation we have already built on this continent. Instead of tearing-up agreements and putting things into reverse, a “No” vote will make it possible for Quebec to benefit from new trade agreements across the Pacific, with Japan, Singapore and Australia, agreements that are already in the works. That is not a step backward. That is progress and change.
   Canada is constantly evolving, in every realm of activity. These are changes that will meet Quebec needs. These are changes buttressed by Quebec’s ambitions and strengths. These are changes without a break. These are changes that would be guaranteed by a “No” vote on October 30.
   The nation state is evolving. So are it’s governments. There is unprecedented consensus today on the need for fundamental structural reform in the way this country works. Not only in Quebec, but everywhere in Canada. Westerners are seeking new flexibility. Ontario wants drastic reforms. The Atlantic provinces are tired of being dependent.
   As Finance Minister, I am in a good position to tell you that the issue of change dominates every meeting I have with my provincial counterparts. Quebec is not isolated on the issue of change. Nobody is isolated.
   These changes will make it possible to capitalize on the special “genius” of federalism: the creativity that goes hand in hand with flexibility. Instead of staking everything on a single approach that could lead to a deadlock, we can apply various approaches and maximize our chances of finding the right one. This process has served us well in the past. Our model for health insurance came from Saskatchewan. Quebec showed us how to get people off welfare, while New Brunswick’s initiatives in training could prove a model for all.
   The challenges Canada faces are growing ever more difficult. We must not let ourselves lose that unique Canadian attribute. In fact we need to make it stronger. This is precisely what a “No” vote will do.
   (In English in original version)
   Let it be absolutely clear. On every issue, a vote for separation is a vote to step backwards. To step backwards on trade. To step backwards on debt. To step backwards on deficits. To step backwards on taxes, on interest rates. To step backwards on jobs, on growth.
   Today, more than ever, the costs of pulling apart are too high, the benefits of pulling together too great. Today more than ever, the values of La R�volution Tranquille will stand us in good stead. And today, more than ever, the achievements of the quiet revolution are at stake.
   Our generation of Quebecers, as with others before, has the opportunity today to determine the future of the generations to come. The opportunity, in our time, to do what previous generations of Quebecers did in theirs — to confidently choose the course of openness. To lead again.
   Canada has a history of change. Change that meets the country’s needs. Change that will be strengthened by the ambitions and the attributes of Quebec. It is change that a “No” vote, on October 30th, guarantees.
   In 1966, I decided to move to Quebec and earn my living here. I’ve lived here ever since. I raised my family here. I built my career here. I launched my political career here. I came because of the Quiet Revolution. I was able to experience first-hand its power, its generosity, and its unprecedented accomplishment. Today, it is our duty to preserve all that it achieved.
   A “No” vote means building on what was achieved by the Quiet Revolution, perpetuating the values of openness, drive, the forging of links and the broadening of horizons.
   The conditions that allow such transformations to emerge are rare in the history of any society. Today, 35 years later, another such opportunity is at hand. A new revolution is underway almost everywhere in Canada.
   It is a revolution that centers on making our federation more flexible, and building an effective form of cooperation among governments. It is a revolution that centers on building an even stronger economy, meeting world competition head-on, placing our public finances on a healthy footing. The opportunity in this revolution is virtually unlimited if we can clear away the cloud of separation.
   This country will continue to change, but Canadians have always been on the leading edge of change. We did not become what we are by standing still. We were guided by the values that we share and the vision that we chose to achieve together.
   The future, along with true prosperity and sustained growth, will belong only to countries like Canada that are already in the starting blocks, to the industries of tomorrow that are already prepared to rebuild tomorrow’s markets: Eastern Europe, Asia, Latin America. Ultimately, the real question we must ask ourselves is: Why not?
   Why not say we will completely rebuild our industrial base within ten years, not to catch up to today’s Japan but, in key areas, to surpass them?
   Why not say to ourselves that within ten years, we will fill the skilled jobs that now go begging because of a shortage of skilled labour, with young people trained here in Canada?
   Why not say that within ten years, Canada will become the world leader in biotechnology and in environmental technology?
   Why not say that in ten years the whole world will be looking to Quebec and Canada as a model?

7. maz, keep them brief, please.

8. Perhaps it’s time someone interviewed the Laporte Family. Lets hear their thoughts on this. Our GG-designate has helped support a known terrorist.
   It’s much like every time the Libs want to defend the Gun Registry they trot out the 14 crying mothers from Montreal. (If nothing else the 44 shootings so far this year in Toronto tell us just how successful this has been – come to thing of it lets also so see more of those 44 grieving mothers.)
   It’s about time someone started playing hardball in this game. Lets make PMPM and the GG-designate look like the idiots that they are.

9. Where’s Jack Layton? Probably toasting the appointment somewhere. Let’s face it. This is the Liberals way of dealing a death blow to any remaining ties to Britain, and herald a new relationship or a stronger relationship with France. This could have been announced before Parliament rose, but wasn’t. This really shows an enormous contempt for Canada, no matter what your views on the monarchy. A French citizen acting as head of state here? The only bright side to all of this is that has suddenly inflamed snoozing Ontarians who have spent their entire history appeasing Quebec, and now find that the prime minister – their LIBERAL PM – has appointed a separatist sympathizer to an historically significant role. Martin is really looking like a loser on this one. Woe, Canada.

10. Wasn’t there talk, at the time, that Laporte’s death was actually a mob hit, and that the government blamed the FLQ to quash the uprising of separatists? I did a paper on this in university, and I do believe one of the separatists actually wrote in his book that it was the mob that carried out the murder, and Trudeau took advantage of it.

11. The tragedy for the West here is that even if every seperatist fear about M. Jean is true it will still not matter to Central Canadians one whit during the next election. And it looks like the new conservatives are going to do everything they can to keep the Central Canadian electorate in the blissfull state that makes them spoiled brats of federation as well. The world could be ending and the center will never subvert themselves to reason because the demonizing antagonism of the west and such is their only politically correct self determinism… we already have a thousand examples, why do we expect anything better when it comes to the GG? The ego of the center matters more than reason itself and how to save them from themselves and to save ourselves from being taken down with them like an anchor in a very deep ocean becomes the essence of things. Real change is going to take some real passion and commitment… but will the West ever reach that threshold? Blogging is a good thing but isn’t putting boots on the ground and getting it done… nothing going on right now is putting boots to the ground and getting it done. Sadly the West needs a Gilles Duceppe-ish provocateur to get the momentum going but the system as it stands now, even the western version of it, cultivates none. What now?

12. Well given the current PM has donated some $1350 to the BQ, according to the audits that came out of the Gomery Commission, the choice of a GG with separatist leanings should come as no surprise.
    One can only gag on all the nonsense that we as the taxpaying public are supposed to gleefully accept.

13. It strikes me as odd the the new Governor General’s husband would collaborate artistically with someone convicted of the kidnap and murder of a provincial cabinet minister. Maybe I’m old fashioned and out of touch with the new Canadian politics.
    Perhaps we can all take this occasion to send our condolences to the Laporte family for their loss, and for the brutally craven partisan thrust of the Liberal Party of Canada.
    Just looking at Mr. Laporte’s photo somehow makes me think that he would have been a good choice for Governor General, if he was still alive. Rest in peace, sir.

14. ” one of Lafond�s books has him saying he would �applaud� Quebec independence �with both hands.� ”
    A koan for M. G-G Elect:
    What is the sound of one hand clapping?
    Duuuuuuuuuuuude.

15. Hey!!…..forget all this seperatist stuff, and forget about the body of Pierre Laporte…he’s dust now. The important things to remember are the front page photo’s of Paul Martin (his emminence and crony of Power Corp) hugging the adopted Haitian 6-year old of Madame Jean. Can you imagine Martin’s thoughts as he saw those front pages? He must have been thinking about all those votes from the ethnic communities in Quebec…”Hey…lookit me!…I’m touching a black person. Really”
    The warm, multi-cultural/Canadian Values practically oozes from his pores. Now if only some emotion would actually touch the dude’s eyes.

16. In a way I feel sorry for this woman…she had a good life, a career, small celebrity and a clutch of local loyal “followers”.
    Now she has been hurled into a controversy by an inept PMO who rushed to fill the GG seat and now prop it up as a political partisan issue. The GG’s office is now soiled by scandal and will remain in controversy because of it…..millions of Canadians detest what Mdme. Jean stands for and she will feel a cold chill from a lot of Canada. She is either the most naive person, or most liberal partisan or longing for the post to the point where she will trade self respect to take it. No one can want a job that bad that they trade their reputation for it (um sorry Paul, forgot you’re in the soul brokering biz). If she was wise and cared for her integrity and country she’d decline the appointment, escape the controversy, save her personal integrity and show some of the character she was said to have.
    To Mdme Jean I would say one thing in considering her choice:
    “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” HL Mencken

17. A good site for those who still have some of their high-school french. Interesting names and events and photos from the FLQ era including the OCTOBER CRISIS, and the MURDER of Pierre Laporte. Usually searches hit on the Pierre Laporte BRIDGE near Quebec City.
    Canadas biggest TERRORIST story rates much less coverage. (Terrorist as opposed to the sanitised term EXTREMIST.) Less coverage that is untill now, haha. Mind you it was during the early years of the Internet.

18. I guess you’d need the URL eh?
    Pardonnez moi s’il vou plait.
    http://www.independance-quebec.com/flq/octobre/texte_recension.html