The French language debate was a very interesting debate in some ways superior to the English language
debate because the issue of national unity was discussed in very revealing
ways and the issues of unemployment, poverty and social policy got a
better airing than in the English language debate.
Was there a clear winner? No. But one has to say that once again Jack Layton did well on several
issues and
Michael Ignatieff did very well on the issue of national unity and
scolding Gilles Duceppe for not moving with the times and understanding
there was little interest in constitutional questions in 2011. Duceppe had a good
come back which is well documented in Quebec.
Things can change
very quickly. Since the PQ can easily become the Government of Quebec in a
year or two and remains committed to sovereignty this issue can arise
again. The debate on this issue revealed once again the potential pitfalls
of the deux nations strategy that all the federalist leaders have more or
less signed onto. When you say that Quebec is a nation its political
leadership expects and will demand the trappings of nationhood something
that will not go down well in English speaking Canada. On the whole though
his French is very serviceable, Stephen Harper in his effort to play a
quiet role was largely absent from the debate and in my view did not not
accomplish much in advancing the Conservative cause in Quebec. Duceppe
defended his turf reasonably well but I suspect that the debate will
weaken his hold on certain Bloc voters who might well defect to the NDP.
The Liberals probably held their own and Ignatieff might well be viewed
more favourably than before the debate although because of the residual
distrust of the Liberals after Gomery and the provincial Government's
unpopularity they have a steep hill to climb to regain their Quebec popularity.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
About haroldchorneyeconomist
I am Professor of political economy at Concordia university in Montréal, Québec, Canada. I received my B.A.Hons (econ.&poli sci) from the University of Manitoba. I also completed my M.A. degree in economics there. Went on to spend two years at the London School of Economics as a Ph.D. student in economics and then completed my Ph.D. in political economy at the University of Toronto. Was named a John W.Dafoe fellow, a CMHC fellow and a Canada Council fellow. I also was named a Woodrow Wilson fellow in 1968 after completing my first class honours undergraduate degree. Worked as an economist in the area of education, labour economics and as the senior economist with the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation for the Government of Manitoba from 1972 to 1978. I also have worked as an economic consultant for MDT socio-economic consultants and have been consulted on urban planning, health policy, linguistic duality and public sector finance questions by the governments of Manitoba, Saskatchewan,the cities of Regina and Saskatoon, Ontario and the Federal government of Canada. I have also been consulted by senior leaders of the British Labour party, MPs from the Progressive Conservative party, the Liberal party and the New Democrats on economic policy questions. Members of the Government of France under the Presidency of Francois Mitterand discussed my work on public sector deficits. I have also run for elected office at the municipal level. I first began to write about quantitative easing as a useful policy option during the early 1980s.
haroldchorneyeconomist 