separatism

Tuesday October 22, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday October 22, 2019

Canada’s divisions have been thrown into sharp relief

December 13, 2018

The 2019 federal election confirmed deep rifts in the country – from reinvigorated Quebec nationalism to Prairie anger over stalled pipelines and a suffering economy. But the results also revealed divisions that rarely get the same attention, such as the widening gulf between cities and the aging populations of rural areas.

Returns Monday night showed the Bloc Québécois, once considered a spent force, competing for the plurality of Quebec’s 78 seats with the Liberals, powered by nationalist sentiment and greying voters; and Alberta and Saskatchewan stayed a deep shade of Conservative blue, with two isolated NDP and Liberal islands among the 48 seats.

December 1, 2016

Vast northern regions of Ontario, Manitoba and and the territories with large Indigenous populations were shades of red and orange, along with downtown Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, where there was a smattering of green. Mid-sized cities and the suburbs were the swing riding checkerboards that decided the election in the end.

The Liberal victory pitted big cities against rural regions, the North against southern cousins and the old against the young. Younger urban and northern ridings largely remained with the centre-left parties, while aging rural areas were resoundingly Conservative and Bloc Québécois.

December 20, 2018

Renewed leadership has helped drive Quebec nationalism and more robust Prairie demands, turning Quebec to the Bloc and keeping the countryside blue.

In Alberta, Jason Kenney has suggested that another term of Trudeau government would threaten national unity, while Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe has been a reliable wingman, pushing Prairie interests with Ottawa.

“It’s certainly true that a Liberal victory of any kind will not be well perceived, especially by the two premiers who have gone to war against Justin Trudeau,” said Daniel Béland, director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada, who taught for 17 years at universities in Alberta and Saskatchewan before moving to the Montreal think tank last year. “It will increase the tension with Ottawa with Justin Trudeau remaining in power, even as a minority [government]. A majority [would have been] a scream fest.”

July 12, 2019

Both Quebec’s second-year Premier François Legault and rookie Bloc Leader Yves-François Blanchet rose by promising to add urgency to provincial demands for more autonomy.

“The big winner of this election is François Legault,” said Jean-Marc Léger, founder of the polling firm that bears his name. “He was at the heart of the campaign, and after what happened in this campaign he’s going to carry a much greater weight when he makes demands.”

Mr. Léger also noted that separatist and nationalist parties garnered 70 per cent of popular support in the 2018 Quebec election and were still well over 50 per cent during most of the Liberal years, from 2003 to 2018.

August 30, 2012

“There is always a strong nationalist sentiment in Quebec,” he said. “It’s just not always apparent.”

During those Liberal years, the province was led by Jean Charest and Philippe Couillard, two of the “most federalist and least nationalist premiers in Quebec history. You have to go back to Adélard Godbout in the Second World War to find a Quebec premier who had so little interest in nationalism,” Prof. Béland said.

The rise of Quebec nationalism and deep Prairie grievance do not pose immediate existential threats to national unity. Separatism is unpopular, and Quebec nationalism and Western alienation have been part of Canadian identity for most of the country’s history.

“Regional differences may be growing at the moment, but in Canada it’s cyclical,” Prof. Béland said. “I don’t think we’ll ever get rid of regionalism or Quebec nationalism. Sometimes they go dormant or are less active, but they are always there.” (Globe & Mail) 

 

Friday September 19, 2014

Friday September 19, 2014By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday September 19, 2014

European Integration Emboldens Europe’s Separatists

Scotland’s referendum has galvanized national movements across Europe. The irony is that this has been made possible in part by the European Union, for decades the driver of economic and political integration across a once war-torn continent.

In the past week, Edinburgh has been like a magnet for politicians across Europe who regard their regions as nations. Representatives from Wales, the Basque Country, Flanders, Catalonia, Galicia, Corsica, Sardinia and Friesland visited the Scottish capital.

They have been emboldened in part by the safety net that the EU is perceived to offer to small countries. The institution that was created to make national borders irrelevant may perversely play a role in creating new ones.

Even as voters in many European countries register growing dissatisfaction with the EU, membership offers smaller nationalities the hope of separation with a minimum of disruption.

Today, “separatism has a spring in its step,” says Charles Grant, director of the London-based Centre for European Reform.

Europe’s borders have already fractured in the last 20 years. With the exception of Czechoslovakia, which split in 1993, these changes have been born out of the violent breakup of the former Yugoslavia.

What is seducing nationalists these days is what Michael Desch, professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame, calls the prospect of Velvet Divorce: a gentle segue into an independent state while preserving membership of institutions like the EU and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and retaining the same currency.

But governments across the continent have viewed developments in the U.K. with growing alarm, as support for Scottish independence appeared to strengthen. Europe’s other capitals, surprised that London has appeared to sleepwalk into a potential constitutional crisis, are unlikely to succumb meekly to the phenomenon.

Their reaction, should Scotland become independent, will be instructive. Scottish Nationalists have portrayed Scottish membership of the EU as a foregone conclusion, suggesting it would be waved into the bloc with little fuss. (Source: Wall Street Journal)

LETTERS to the EDITOR

In my lifelong reading of The Spectator, I’ve never been shocked by a cartoon until now. The editorial cartoon of Friday, Sept. 19 was funny to a point. That point was the last cell of the multi-celled cartoon. The real life events upon which it was based are horrible. The Spectator doesn’t need to embed these events, even more, into the Zeitgeist by depicting them as the punch line of a cartoon. It was insensitive, tasteless and thoughtless. You went too far. — B. Kish, Hamilton

Insensitive cartoon disappointing – September 22, 2014: Sorry, Graeme MacKay. I’m really disappointed but that was as insensitive as anything you’ve ever done. I only hope and pray that no family members of these victims ever lay eyes on it. — Virginia Coombs, Stoney Creek

Untimely and tasteless trash – September 23, 2014: I was beginning to think cartoonist Graeme MacKay’s work was showing some maturity. After a brief break, some of his concepts were starting to display some intelligence. However, we seem to be back to stuff that portrays the lack of sensitivity and taste that have been his mark in the past. The cartoon Scotland’s Influence Endures is pathetic and the portrayal of an ISIS executioner with a knife at the throat of a prisoner, especially now when people are totally sickened by what has happened to these poor victims, is obscene. It is hard to believe that The Spectator would publish such untimely and tasteless trash. — Roy Coombs, Simcoe

Scottish cartoon went too far with ISIS – September 24, 2014: I am totally disgusted by the editorial cartoon that appeared in The Spectator on Sept. 19. I cannot stomach anything that would include Scotland and ISIS in the same reference. Is this supposed to be funny or witty? What part of a drawing showing someone being beheaded is in keeping with decency? In this case, cartoonist Graeme MacKay has offended many. It is indefensible that your paper can continue to publish his work. — David McIntyre, Hamilton

SOCIAL MEDIA

Post by The Hamilton Spectator.

 

Commentary by Graeme MacKay

Last week the above cartoon in advance of the day the world was to find out the results of the referendum on Scottish independence. Of course, no one knew how the final numbers would turn out, but the pollsters said it was to be close. The choice for me therefore was to draw something that would work with either a yes or no victory. There was an overwhelmingly negative reaction to the cartoon (see above), yet with all the thumbs down communicated to me through social media, I’m still not clear why this cartoon is so repulsive to so many… continued

Tuesday September 9, 2014

Tuesday September 9, 2014Tuesday September 9, 2014

Scotland – Vote No and get something better?

On the morning after the poll before, “Vote No and get something better” summed up George Osborne’s message. It’s a tried and trusted message which worked in the independence referendum in Quebec when a last minute poll lead for Yes was transformed into a narrow No. It is, though, a message with a difficult history in Scotland.

Angus MacScotland stickerThirty five years ago it was precisely what Scots were told when they were voting in a referendum on a much more modest proposal – to create a Scottish Parliament with some devolved powers.
A former prime minister, a Scot and, as it happens, a Tory, Sir Alec Douglas Home urged his countrymen to vote No and get “something better”. The referendum rejected devolution and what they got soon afterwards was 18 years of Margaret Thatcher’s government and no devolution at all (until, that is, Labour were re-elected in 1997).

That is just one reason why Osborne’s promise of a plan to transfer new powers to Holyrood – covering tax raising, spending and benefits – caused such confusion yesterday. It is why Alex Salmond felt able to attack it as a sign of “panic” on the No side.

The other reason is that the three rival Westminster parties – the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats – have not agreed a plan for which precise powers to devolve. Each party has published its own set of proposals which overlap in the areas Osborne listed.

The plan he was talking about – but which is still being argued about behind the scenes – is to give Scottish voters certainty that this time – unlike last time – they are guaranteed to get “something better” whoever forms the next government in Westminster.

The Lib Dem Scottish secretary Alastair Carmichael has long talked about the idea of setting up a Scottish Constitutional Convention bringing together representatives of all parties – including the SNP – and none (trade unionists, business groups, the churches etc). This would hammer out a new settlement which all the Westminster parties would then promise to implement whoever is elected in the 2015 general election.

Who should announce this, where and how poses its own problems since Scottish voters – like voters right across the world – are deeply mistrustful of what politicians say. If all three party leaders stood together it would simply allow Alex Salmond to say “I told you they were all the same and that Labour were in bed with the Tories.”

A striking finding of this weekend’s YouGov poll is that the leader of the Labour Party – for so long the natural party of government in Scotland – is trusted by under a quarter of Scottish voters, the same number as it happens as trust David Cameron. (Continued: BBC News)

Thursday, March 13, 2014

Thursday, March 13, 2014Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday, March 13, 2014

Is the Rest of Canada still willing to fight to keep Quebec?

“Until next time!” pledges René Lévesque, after his bid for separation was soundly beaten on Referendum Night in 1980. With Quebec now beginning another election campaign — and the Parti Quebecois looking good in early polls — is Canada heading for the next time? Some are asking if it has the will to fight for Quebec one more time.

The Parti Quebecois has come a long way in the 18 months since Madame Marois came to power with a minority government. And the first poll of the campaign – conducted yesterday morning by Leger Marketing — shows the PQ with a strong lead among francophone voters. Most indications at the outset of the campaign are that she will emerge this time with a majority.

And while the PQ hasn’t committed to holding another referendum on Quebec sovereignty, Madame Marois said in February that she is a separatist and if elected she has the right to hold one if the support is there.

Popular support for that within Quebec is one thing. But nearly 20 years since since the last referendum, how energetic is the rest of Canada for another fight for Quebec?

Michael Den Tandt says the appetite to fight to keep Quebec in Canada is waning. He is a columnist with Post Media and joins us from our Ottawa studio. (Continued: CBC News)

SOCIAL MEDIA

Shared at: iPolitics and…

Post by L’Expérience lol78.

Friday, March 1, 2013

Friday, March 1, 2013By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday, March 1, 2013

House calls being made as part of EI audit

Opposition leader Tom Mulcair has been working tirelessly for nearly a year to position his New Democrats as the government in waiting, and himself as a future prime minister. Thursday both those objectives grew measurably more difficult to achieve.

With the defection of Quebec NDP MP Claude Patry to the moribund but apparently still kicking. With the defection of Quebec NDP MP Claude Patry to the moribund but apparently still kicking Bloc Quebecois, it now becomes clear that Mulcair is fighting on three fronts to hold the historic gains made by his party in the 2011 election. Never mind building on those gains: Mulcair will be putting out this fire for the foreseeable future, focusing on the preservation of his Quebec beachhead. Even that is no longer a foregone conclusion. There’s Justin Trudeau to consider.

The truly aggravating thing for Mulcair here must be the realization that he brought this on himself with his ill-considered bid to “improve on” the federal Clarity Act in January. That was a battle of choice, not necessity. He could have left well enough alone. Now the damage is done, and its ripple effects are spreading.

Consider how humbly it began, with Bill C-457, initiated by Bloc MP Andre Bellavance. Had that passed – it was never more than a goad, on account of the Bloc holding, at that time, four seats – it would have repealed the law that sets the terms for separation. Among other measures, the Clarity Act states Canada cannot entertain such negotiations absent a clear majority, voting on a clear question.  (Source: National Post)