Quebec's War of the Poppies

To contact us Click HERE
Like just about every issue in Quebec, language, sovereignty and political allegiances tinge the debate, so it's not surprising that when it comes to Remembrance Day and it associated trappings of the poppy and military pomp and circumstance, forces collide.

Last week, the Canadian legion and anglophone forces in general were up in arms because Pauline Marois placed a Fleur-de-lys at the center of her Poppy.

"Desecration!" they shouted, raising such a din that Pauline decided that in this case, discretion would be the better part of valour and so removed the offending accoutrement.

But sovereigntists leapt to her defence, reminding anyone who would listen that adding a Maple leaf or a Canadian flag to the poppy has always been  acceptable. 
 
And so  readers, I'm afeared that in this case, the evidence falls on the side of  those supporting Marois, the argument summed neatly by the old saying... What is sauce for the goose, est bonne pour le jars."
It really shouldn't be a big deal, but of course it is, this is Quebec, where nationalists have always had a problem with Remembrance Day, not because it celebrates the sacrifices of Canadian (and Quebec) soldiers but because the military is seen as a federalist trapping, based on the British model and closely associated with the hated monarchy.

Canada's  Royal 22^e Régiment

Last year when Prince William and Kate visited Quebec City, the  royal couple spoke before a parade of Quebec's most storied regiment, the Royal 22nd, known affectionately as the 'Vandoos.' Link

As you can see from the pictures, the dress uniforms of the regiment closely resemble those of the Queen's Guard, familiar to anyone who has seen the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace, in person or on the TV and it's something that irks nationalists to no end. 
The fact that so many enthusiastic Quebecers turned out to greet the Royal couple was also a bitter pill for nationalists to swallow, having prepared a counter-demonstration, which was kept 
well away from the proceedings.

Great Britain's Queen's Guards

But today's nationalist's problem with Canada's military, goes back a lot longer than the royal visit last summer, probably back to 1940, when conscription was the burning issue of the day.
Quebec had been promised by the federal government that in return for its electoral support, conscription would not be introduced in Canada.
Two years later, a plebiscite was held wherein Ottawa asked the nation for permission to go back on that promise.
The Yes side won, allowing the government to renege, but in Quebec, francophones voted 85% against the proposition and the betrayal and broken promise outraged the province.

Many Quebec government MPs left the William Lyon Mackenzie King government in protest to set up the Bloc populaire canadien.   Hmm...Sound familiar?

And so, all single men up to forty-five were required to register for the draft.
This set off a panic in Quebec, the Church and the government furiously denouncing conscription with many politicians advising citizens not to coöperate, resulting in violent anti-conscription riots in Montreal and Quebec city.
In an effort to thwart the draft, the Church advised young men to get married and organized mass outdoor weddings, held in places like Montreal's Jarry Park.
Many young men just disappeared, some even hiding in the forests like cowards, but to most Quebecers, these draft-dodgers were highly respected for their 'bravery' and were even referred to in the popular press as 'les patriotes.'
At any rate, the number of men actually drafted were few and less than 2,500 draftees went overseas, with less than seventy making the ultimate sacrifice.

Years later, the unpopularity of the war in Quebec and the organized resistance to conscription became an embarrassment and humiliation for nationalists.
Statements like this, made by Montreal mayor Camillien Houde in 1939 came back to haunt them;

"If war comes, and if Italy is on one side and England on the other, the sympathy of the French-Canadians in Quebec will be on the side of Italy. Remember that the great majority of French-Canadians are Roman Catholics, and that the Pope is in Rome. We French-Canadians are Normans, not Latins, but we have become Latinized over a long period of years. The French-Canadians are Fascists by blood, but not by name. The Latins have always been in favour of dictators."

Many in Quebec, like in France and some in England supported Mussolini and Hitler at the war's beginning and when victory was finally declared and the real horror story of European fascism was revealed, they realized that they had backed the wrong horse.

In 1992  Esther Delisle, published The Traitor and the Jew, a bombshell which explored prewar fascism and antisemitism in Quebec. The book ripped apart Lionel Groulx and other fascists, something that nationalist could not endure. The book caused such a ruckus that the author was vilified as the real traitor, her honest, yet mortifying description of Quebec in the years leading up to the war, unbearable and impossible to digest, fifty years after the fact.

Those nationalists who created the sovereignty movement back in the sixties remember the war years as a humiliation, not only because opposition to conscription looked cowardly in retrospect but also because of the deep fascist attachment that many in the anti-conscription movement held.

Like some Irish today, who still cannot abide the British military, history plays an important part in understanding why wearing the red poppy to nationalist Quebecers is so distasteful.

And so Quebec nationalists have consistently boycotted Remembrance Day ceremonies, the poppy a painful reminder of the inglorious past.
French schools, controlled by left-leaning nationalists, make a special effort to ignore Remembrance Day with the unfortunate result that most Quebec Francophones of this generation are painfully unaware of it significance.

Although the percentage of Quebecers answering the call to arms was smaller than in the rest of Canada, many did volunteer and served bravely, and sorrowfully, many did not come home.
It remains a bit sad that because of the cowardice of some, the bravery of others is swept under the carpet in Quebec.
I imagine that the sacrifice of those francophones Quebecers who did serve honourably, makes the humiliation of those who did not, all the more painful.

At any rate, in a change of tactics and in an effort to be seen as respecting the war dead, a nationalist group came up with a Blue Poppy, something they could wear to honour the dead, without honouring the Canadian military itself.

In a video recorded at a cenotaph ceremony in Quebec City last year, Denis Julien explained that because of the Blue Poppy, Quebec sovereigntists can show their respect for fallen soldiers, without participating in ceremonies dominated by a Canadian military that they did not support. Watch the speech{fr}

You know readers, that's something I can live with, even though a lot of you won't agree and I fully expect to take flack for that opinion. 
The Blue poppy allows some Quebecers, who would otherwise not, honour those who served and sacrificed.
From what I saw in the videos the ceremonies where dignified and respectful and if it contributes to Quebecers understanding the efforts of those who answered the call, I cannot complain...

As if the competing Blue and Red poppies weren't enough, Quebec has now seen the birth of another entry, the 'white' poppy.

Largely a creation of Quebec leftists and Quebec solidaire, the white poppy pays respect to all the victims of war.

"As noted by the group, wearing the white poppy also aims to dissociate one from the tendency of some political powers that use the "Remembrance Day" to justify wars and increasing militarism.

Read a story about the backlash to the White poppy. Link

Remembrance Day in Quebec...it's very complicated.

I was reminded by a reader, of a piece I wrote two years ago about Quebec's general disrespect of Remembrance Day.
It still is relevant and a good read for this weekend (if I do say so myself) in the run up to Remembrance Day.
Read:  Annual Remembrance Day Embarrassment in Quebec

I bet many of you have never attended a Remembrance Day ceremony, other then standing at attention in school at eleven o'clock.

This year Remembrance Day falls on a Sunday, so there's an opportunity for you to attend.
If you have children, take them to see the vets, I know the effort is appreciated.

Have a great weekend!

PQ's Sixty Days of Sleaze

To contact us Click HERE

"ATTENTION! No speakee de Heenglish SVP!"

Aside from the monumental and very public cock-ups that has been the hallmark of the first sixty days of the Marois government, behind the scenes, there has been a lot of sleaze that has gone largely unreported, but perhaps not unnoticed.

Minister after minister has made a fool of him or herself starting with the finance minister, down to the lowly family minister, with Pauline forced to correct, backtrack and clarify the early missteps of the government.
Perhaps understanding the tentative and fragile lifespan of the government, it seems that the PQ is trying to do as much as it can, as soon as it can, likely without reasoned thought, damn the consequences.

This post takes a look at the behind-the-scene shenanigans, measures which expose the PQ for what it says it isn't, making a mockery of the PQ's promise to be a party of integrity and change.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Taking a page out of German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle's playbook, who refused to take a question in English posed by a reporter in a news conference in Germany,  Sylvain Gaudreault, minister of Municipal Affairs refused to answer a reporter's question asked in English at the tail-end of a press conference that he gave last week concerning the resignation of Laval mayor Gilles Vaillancourt.

In the incident in Germany, the Minister, reminded a BBC reporter rather pointedly that they were in Germany and that it was a German news conference and therefore would be conducted in German. He did however have an aide translate the question and answer, back and forth. Watch the incident 

The Quebec minister made no such explanation when asked a question in English, choosing to turn his back and rudely stalk away.
In another news conference last Tuesday, one that he shared  with Jean-François Lisée, a press officer told reporters that only Lisée would take English questions. Link{Fr}

It's hard to draw a definitive conclusion, either Gaudreault was not confident of his English or he was floating a trial balloon for the PQ, testing the reaction to ministers refusing to speak to the Press in English.
Now this policy would jive with what the PQ is saying, that being bilingual as a condition of employment, where not strictly necessary, is contrary to government policy. Recently PQ cabinet minister Diane DeCourcy has been pedalling the idea that speaking English at work, when not absolutely necessary should be discouraged ;

"De Courcy, who acknowledged the merits of bilingualism on an individual level, said the government has to act to prevent a perceived erosion of French in Montreal.
She said that erosion will be precipitated if mandatory bilingualism becomes the norm in the workplace." Link

And so, if Ministers routinely answer questions in English, why shouldn't employees do the same when speaking with English bosses?
Given the tough minority position, it seems that the only thing the PQ feels comfortable doing, is attacking on the language front, mostly because the opposition parties are hard pressed to be seen supporting the English rights.

Marois announced last week that a revamped Bill 101 is on its way, with changes that will supposedly toughen up rules for small business, but probably not so draconian as to forcing Bill 101 language requirements for cegeps, something that the opposition would likely vote down and end the PQ's 'reign of error.'
 
That being said, ministers and especially the Premier, refusing to speak English, should it become policy, would represent a monumental shift in language relations, a final message to the English that they are irrelevant and that Anglos are to be tolerated much like the special education students riding the short bus.
In other words, be nice to them because they are 'special' but ignore them in practice. 

As the PQ bumbles along, making a hash out of one political file after another, underneath the very public fiasco is the unspoken reality that Pauline's PQ is practising the same partisan politics that they accused the Charest government of visiting upon the province.
In other words, punish your enemies and reward your friends with plush government appointments.

After all, it's a Quebec tradition perfected by Premier Maurice Duplessis way back in the forties and fifties where partisanship was raised to an art form and where wholesale changes were made in the civil service, government appointments and business partners with each change in government.

Things were so partisan back then, that companies doing the snow removal of provincial highways were designated as either 'red' or 'blue' and won contracts depending on which government was in power.
Nothing much has changed despite Pauline making noises about bringing integrity back to politics and getting rid of corruption.
She has embraced the policy of rewarding friends and party hacks with reckless abandon.

Now the most obvious appointment and the one that got the Press in an uproar was the appointment of André Boisclair as Delegate General to New York, just about the plushiest gig in government, it comes complete with a big expense account and a ritzy apartment paid for by the government. Mr. Boisclair will oversee a staff of about thirty in another bloated and under-performing government agency.  Link
The Press has roundly criticized her for making this appointment, calling it a reward for Boisclair's support of Marois during the turbulent months when her leadership was under attack and where friends were few and far between.

But of all the pork-barrel appointments made so far, this is actually one that I  can live with, unlike the Press.

Mr Boisclair is a Pequiste from another era, even though he is young. Unlike today's inexperienced and academically challenged Cabinet members, Mr. Boisclair recognizing his lack of an undergraduate degree attended the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where he perfected his English, following in the footsteps of other PQ stalwarts of old who attended school in English.

Mr. Boisclair is experienced and has always conducted himself honourably and respectfully in public. I never heard him utter a negative word towards the English or minorities. When Mr. Boisclair assures us that he is going to New York to promote Quebec and not sovereignty, I take him at his word.
One would expect that the delegate General position in New York would go to an Anglo, but when Pauline checks her cupboard, there's nary one to be found and let's face it if Mr. Harper can appoint Lawrence Cannon to be Canada's Ambassador to France, Pauline's appointment makes no less political sense.

All that being said, the rest of Pauline's appointments do represent the worst of partisanship starting with the most egregious appointment of all, that of failed PQ candidate Nicolas Girard as head of the l'Agence métropolitaine de transport (AMT), a job for which he has zero qualifications and where the interim and highly qualified predecessor was let go to make room for daddy.
Éric Caire of the ADQ ripped into the government for the appointment.

"The Parti Québécois has appointed a person who has no experience in managing a sensitive post for urban transport in the metropolitan area of Montreal. Yet while it was in opposition, the Parti Québécois regularly tore its shirt over patronage. In the Assembly, Minister Gaudreault was unable to justify the appointment. Our request is simple: publish the list of all candidates who were considered for  the position of CEO of AMT and people can judge for themselves whether it was a good appointment "said the member for La Peltrie.  Link{Fr}

Of course, no such list was forthcoming because nobody else was considered for the job.
I ran this political cartoon before, but it remains relevant.

BEFORE: "Partisan nominations by the Charest government are a scandal!" AFTER "Gulp!"

 When in opposition Mr Girard was one of the biggest complainers about patronage and pork, accusing Premier Charest on many occasion of ethical lapses.
The cartoon above lampoons the utter hypocrisy.

As I said, patronage appointments are the order of business for all Quebec governments, the Journal de Quebec accused Jean Charest's Liberals of making 523 patronage appointments over the course of the nine years in power!

And so not wishing to be outdone, Pauline has embarked on an ambitious program of her own with patronage announcements being made almost daily.

For your information, this is what one of those announcements looks like, publicized without fanfare usually late in the week, when nobody is paying attention;

Nominations du Conseil des ministres

Québec, le jeudi 20 septembre 2012 – Le Conseil des ministres a procédé aux nominations suivantes à sa séance d’aujourd’hui.

Ministère du Conseil exécutif

M. Gilbert Charland est nommé secrétaire général associé aux Institutions démocratiques et à la Participation citoyenne au ministère du Conseil exécutif. M. Charland était membre et président de la Commission municipale du Québec.
M^me Nicole Dussault est nommée secrétaire adjointe aux Institutions démocratiques et à la Participation citoyenne au ministère du Conseil exécutif. M^me Dussault était secrétaire générale associée à ce ministère.
M. Jacques Gosselin est nommé secrétaire adjoint aux Institutions démocratiques et à la Participation citoyenne au ministère du Conseil exécutif. M. Gosselin était sous-ministre associé responsable de l’application de la politique linguistique au ministère de la Culture, des Communications et de la Condition féminine.
M^me Josée Tremblay est nommée secrétaire générale associée à la Capitale-Nationale au ministère du Conseil exécutif. M^me Tremblay était directrice générale de la Conférence régionale des élus de la Capitale-Nationale.
M^me Michèle Drouin est nommée secrétaire adjointe à la Capitale-Nationale au ministère du Conseil exécutif. M^me Drouin était sous-ministre associée au ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation.

Secrétariat du Conseil du trésor

M. Yves Ouellet est nommé secrétaire du Conseil du trésor. M. Ouellet était sous-ministre du ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune.

Ministère des Finances et de l’Économie

M. Luc Monty est nommé sous-ministre aux Finances et à l’Économie. M. Monty était sous-ministre du ministère des Finances.
M. Éric Ducharme est nommé sous-ministre associé aux Finances et à l’Économie. M. Ducharme était sous-ministre adjoint au ministère des Finances.
M^me Suzanne Lévesque ainsi que MM. Mario Bouchard, Jean-Marc Sauvé et Alain Veilleux sont nommés sous-ministres adjoints aux Finances et à l’Économie. M^me Lévesque ainsi que MM. Bouchard, Sauvé et Veilleux étaient sous-ministres adjoints au ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation.
M^me Suzanne Giguère est nommée sous-ministre associée au Tourisme. M^me Giguère était sous-ministre du ministère du Tourisme.
M^me Elizabeth MacKay et M. Georges Vacher sont nommés sous-ministres adjoints au Tourisme. M^me MacKay et M. Vacher étaient sous-ministres adjoints au ministère du Tourisme.

Ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport

M. Bernard Matte est nommé sous-ministre du ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport. M. Matte était sous-ministre du ministère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale.

Ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur, de la Recherche, de la Science et de la Technologie

M^me Christine Tremblay est nommée sous-ministre à l’Enseignement supérieur, à la Recherche, à la Science et à la Technologie. M^me Tremblay était sous-ministre du ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation.
M. Jean Belzile est nommé sous-ministre adjoint à l’Enseignement supérieur, à la Recherche, à la Science et à la Technologie. M. Belzile était sous-ministre adjoint à la Direction générale de la recherche, de l’Innovation, de la science et société au ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation.

Ministère de la Justice

M^me Nathalie G. Drouin est nommée sous-ministre du ministère de la Justice. M^me Drouin était surintendante de la solvabilité et directrice générale des affaires juridiques à l’Autorité des marchés financiers.

Ministère des Ressources naturelles

M. Patrick Déry est nommé sous-ministre aux Ressources naturelles. M. Déry était surintendant de l’assistance aux clientèles et de l’encadrement de la distribution à l’Autorité des marchés financiers.

Ministère du Travail, de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale

M^me Brigitte Pelletier est nommée sous-ministre au Travail, à l’Emploi et à la Solidarité sociale. M^me Pelletier était membre, présidente et directrice générale de la Commission des normes du travail.

Ministère des Relations internationales, de la Francophonie et du Commerce extérieur

M. Michel Audet est nommé sous-ministre aux Relations internationales, à la Francophonie et au Commerce extérieur. M. Audet était directeur de l’Institut québécois des hautes études internationales à l’Université Laval.
M. Jean Séguin est nommé sous-ministre adjoint aux Relations internationales, à la Francophonie et au Commerce extérieur. M. Séguin était sous-ministre adjoint à la Direction générale des affaires économiques internationales au ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation.

Ministère de la Culture et des Communications

M^me Rachel Laperrière est nommée sous-ministre à la Culture et aux Communications. M^me Laperrière était directrice principale du Service des Affaires institutionnelles de la Ville de Montréal.

Ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles

M. Robert Baril est nommé sous-ministre du ministère de l’Immigration et des Communauté culturelles. M. Baril était sous-ministre adjoint à ce ministère.
M. Jacques Beauchemin est nommé sous-ministre associé à la langue française, responsable de l’application de la politique linguistique, au ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles. M. Beauchemin était professeur au Département de sociologie de l’Université du Québec à Montréal.
M^me Claire Deronzier est nommée, à compter du 27 septembre 2012, sous-ministre adjointe au ministère de l’Immigration et des Communauté culturelles. M^me Deronzier est actuellement sous-ministre adjointe au ministère des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de l’Occupation du territoire.

Ministère des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de l’Occupation du territoire

M. Marc-Urbain Proulx est nommé sous-ministre associé aux Régions au ministère des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de l’Occupation du territoire. M. Proulx était professeur au Département des sciences économiques et administratives de l’Université du Québec à Chicoutimi et directeur scientifique du Centre de recherche sur le développement territorial.

Commission municipale du Québec

M. Denis Marsolais est nommé membre et président de la Commission municipale du Québec. M. Marsolais était sous-ministre du ministère de la Justice.

Commission des normes du travail

M^me Marie-Claude Champoux est nommée membre, présidente et directrice générale par intérim de la Commission des normes du travail. M^me Champoux était sous-ministre du ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles.

Régie des rentes du Québec

M^me Sylvie Barcelo est nommée vice-présidente de la Régie des rentes du Québec. M^me Barcelo était sous-ministre du ministère de la Culture, des Communications et de la Condition féminine.   Link{fr}

And here's another dizzying list of nomination;

Communiqué - 7 novembre 2012

Nominations du Conseil des ministres

Québec – Le Conseil des ministres a procédé aux nominations suivantes à sa séance d’aujourd’hui.

Ministère des Relations internationales, de la Francophonie et du Commerce extérieur

M. André Boisclair est nommé, à compter du 12 novembre 2012, délégué général du Québec à New York. M. Boisclair est actuellement consultant en développement stratégique et en affaires publiques.

Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux

M. Sylvain Gagnon est nommé de nouveau sous-ministre associé au ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.

Ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles

M. Younes Mihoubi est nommé, à compter du 14 janvier 2013, sous-ministre adjoint au ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles. M. Mihoubi est actuellement directeur du Bureau d’immigration à Hong Kong du ministère des Relations internationales, de la Francophonie et du Commerce extérieur.

Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation

Mme Manon Boucher est nommée, à compter du 17 décembre 2012, sous-ministre adjointe par intérim au ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation. Mme Boucher est actuellement chef de poste provisoire et directrice des affaires économiques de la Délégation générale du Québec à New York au ministère des Relations internationales, de la Francophonie et du Commerce extérieur.

Commission administrative des régimes de retraite et d’assurances

M. André Legault est nommé, à compter du 26 novembre 2012, membre du conseil d’administration et président-directeur général de la Commission administrative des régimes de retraite et d’assurances. M. Legault est actuellement vice-président à la Direction générale de la législation, des enquêtes et du registraire des entreprises de l’Agence du revenu du Québec.

Conseil des appellations réservées et des termes valorisants

Mme Anne-Marie Granger Godbout est nommée membre et présidente-directrice générale du Conseil des appellations réservées et des termes valorisants. Mme Granger Godbout était directrice générale et secrétaire de la Fédération des producteurs acéricoles du Québec.

Régie du cinéma

M. Michel Létourneau est nommé, à compter du 19 novembre 2012, membre et président de la Régie du cinéma. M. Létourneau est actuellement président et conseiller principal de La Firme « avec un accent » inc.

Commission de protection du territoire agricole du Québec

Mme Diane Montour est nommée, à compter du 26 novembre 2012, membre de la Commission de protection du territoire agricole du Québec. Mme Montour est actuellement directrice générale de Femmes en parcours innovateur.

Commission des partenaires du marché du travail

Mmes Josée Bouchard et Denise Boucher ainsi que MM. Yves-Thomas Dorval et François Vaudreuil sont nommés de nouveau membres de la Commission des partenaires du marché du travail.
Mme Louise Chabot est nommée membre de cette

Héma-Québec

M. Serge Montplaisir est nommé de nouveau membre du conseil d’administration d’Héma-Québec.

Comité consultatif pour l’environnement de la Baie James

Mme Marie-Josée Lizotte est nommée membre du Comité consultatif pour l’environnement de la Baie James.

Comité de révision des médecins omnipraticiens

Mme Francine Gingras est nommée membre fonctionnaire du comité de révision des médecins omnipraticiens.

Investissement Québec

M. Mario Bouchard est nommé membre du conseil d’administration d’Investissement Québec.

Régie des rentes du Québec

Mme Danielle Savoie est nommée membre indépendante du conseil d’administration de la Régie des rentes du Québec.

Readers, the above is just a small sampling, for lists of further PQ nominations go HERE
It's just more of the same and the fun has just begun!

And so the PQ is off and running, naming close to 100 people to positions in just sixty days.
As far as I checked, not one Anglo is included and just one or two ethnics are on the lists.
While I can't ascertain their political leanings or their contributions to PQ fortunes, I think it is safe to make certain assumptions.

But now, even the French media is starting to take notice of the wholesale PQ patronage riot.
Denis Lessard of La Presse writes:

"Plus ça change, plus c'est pareil. 

In opposition, the Parti Québécois severely criticized the decision of the Charest government to appoint a close advisor to the Prime Minister, Michel Guitard, to the job of vice president of communications of Investissement Québec. However, Pauline Marois will appoint one of her own: Pascal Monette." Link{Fr}

It seems that Pauline Marois, in an effort to get a secure job for a loyalist and rid herself of an 'enemy,' fired Michel Guitard, who takes with him a termination indemnity of close to $300,000.

As Quebec is going through the wrenching agony of the Charbonneau Commission detailing corruption in the construction industry, the government of Pauline Marois is tut-tutting as a judgemental innocent, blaming 'federalists' for any and all ethical wrongdoings.

But by engaging in an orgy of slimy political appointments, the PQ exposes themselves as just more of the same which leads me to conclude that the old days of red and blue snow removal companies are not behind us.

And so, "Jobs for the Boys" the cynical term used to describe the practice of hiring your own, is not only alive and well in Quebec, it is thriving, regardless of which political party is in power.

Imagine the novel idea of having independent hiring boards charged with analysing and determining the best candidates for publicly appointed jobs, it's an idea that is so frightening that no political party would dare consider it.

Of the 513 patronage appointments supposedly made in the nine years of the Charest government, Pauline's hundred or so appointments represent twenty percent of this total, this after two months in power!
Congratulations to Pauline on this 'new' and 'honest' approach to politics, PQ style!

Understanding Quebec's Finances and the new PQ Budget

To contact us Click HERE
The tabling of Quebec's new budget yesterday afternoon, hasn't afforded me the time necessary to study and comment upon it in so short a time.

These documents are complicated and what appears obvious upon first glance, isn't always borne out when the full document is analyzed, which takes time.

There's always a danger that the mainstream media, in an effort to offer instant analysis,  gets the immediate interpretation wrong, the very best example that I can think of is the wholesale misreporting of the US Supreme Court Decision on Obamacare, where many media outlets, including CNN, falsely reported that the court had knocked down the statute when in fact it had done the opposite and upheld the law. Read a story about the blown coverage

I'll look over the budget today and offer an opinion either Friday or Monday, but I thought that it would be very useful to understand what exactly Quebec's budget is, how much the government takes in terms of revenue and how and where it spends the money.
Perhaps with a little better understanding, we can all make better sense of what the current budget changed, for better or for worse.

Here is a high resolution illustration, representing last year's budget, one that clearly shows how much money the governments take in and where the money is spent. Unfortunately, it is available in French only, but it's not so hard to understand.

You can click the picture to enlarge it then drag it to your desktop where you can use a picture viewing software (MAC="Preview") to enlarge it. Because the illustration is such high resolution, even the little, little writing is clear when enlarged.


Before we start analyzing how the Quebec government spends this money, we should have a general idea about how it raises this money.
I'm only going to provide a rough sketch, not wishing to impose information overload, this post is actually meant to give readers some understanding and background on last year's budget spending, so we can better understand the provisions and changes in the new PQ budget tabled yesterday.

The government actually takes in more money than the 73 billion spent, but that difference is placed into special funds, meant to cover specific long term projects, not covered here. We won't discuss those elements here.

Where the Quebec government gets the 73 billion dollars it spends;  

34%.............. personal income taxes and payroll tax levies
17%.............. transfers from Ottawa (equalization and other transfers, etc.)
15%............. provincial sales tax, gas tax, tobacco, licensing etc.
6%.............. dividends from SAQ, Hydro-Quebec, Loto-Quebec
4.5%...........  corporate taxes
7%.............. premium collected (social security, drug plans, etc.)
8%.............. investment income
9%.............. other income
3%.............. deficit
Link to StatsCan

Readers, the numbers above are very approximate....

Now to understand the chart above and how the government spends the 73 billion dollars, follow the spokes radiating out to the various coloured balloons representing a major area of spending. Around that balloon written in the same colour are sub balloons and smaller details describing spending within that sphere.

Let us consider one of the smaller and easy to understand sections, that of "Famille et Aines" (Family and Seniors) the green spoke, radiating out from the center at about the 6:30 position at the bottom.

That green spoke brings us to a bubble that represents $2.4 billion in spending and as you can see from the satellite comments, $2.1 billion of this money is earmarked for daycare and other family care facilities.

Following the same method you can follow all the spending of each major sphere of government expenditures, it's quite interesting.

Health and social services = $29    billion
Education                          = $16     billion
Debt service                       = $8      billion
Municipal affairs               = $3.7    billion 
Employment                      = $4.2    billion

For your information, the royalties on natural resources, something the PQ has announced with great fanfare that it is increasing, is hardly the windfall promised.  Even if Quebec were to charge 50% more, it would raise an additional $600 million at best, not a drop in the bucket, but not a game changer.

And by the way, in my last post I told you that Quebec gives away an amazing $6 billion in subsidies to Quebec business each year, three times more than Ontario does, despite Ontario raising considerably more taxes than Quebec.

You won't find a direct reference to it in the chart above, the subsidy is done through tax credits, whereby taxes to be collected are forgiven. This leads to Quebec corporations to contribute a paltry 4.5% of the 73 billion Quebec budget through corporate taxes.

As for me, I think I pulled away some interesting facts from the chart, the first and most important, the fact that almost half the budget goes to pay for government and quasi-government salaries which go up each year by a couple of percentage points adding a billion or two to the budget each year. The only way to change this is to cut down on the size of the civil service.

This reminds me of the best advice my late father ever gave me, which was that it is more important to watch what you spend rather than what you make.
Living within your means, and putting a little aside is a sure road map to prosperity.  In tough times, spend less.
It makes sense, even for a government.

As for services like subsidized day care, reduced tuition fees, I am not against these programs on principle, but object that they are universal, meaning everyone rich or poor gets the same benefit.

The idea that a lawyer in a BMW can pull up to a public subsidized daycare (an urban myth?) and drop off her child there for $7 a day is galling.

As for tuition, let me tell you my personal story.
My son was accepted to a medical school in the USA which informed us in the acceptance letter that tuition was $40,000 per year, to be paid up front.

When he was finally accepted to medical school in Montreal, I almost choked at the low tuition of about $5,000 per year, what a bargain!
As a successful businessman I certainly could have paid a lot more than that and I would have done so  gladly, without begrudging students from less fortunate circumstances paying a much reduced rate.

I'm not against enhanced government services, I'm against universality.

A solid tweak to these programs can make them socially and financially responsible, but hey, that's just one man's opinion.
What is yours?

Quebec's Nanny State Running out of Gas

To contact us Click HERE
In her  inaugural  speech as Premier of Quebec, Pauline Marois outlined her government's plan for the next legislative session and while the media focused on her agenda of fighting corruption and strengthening language legislation, buried among the more controversial themes was this bizarre statement that caused hardly a ripple in the press.

"A parliamentary commission will be created to study the relevance and impact of a law which would regulate book prices. The Government wishes to support authors, publishers and booksellers from Quebec who can not compete against the big box stores that offer discounts from 25% to 30% off the suggested retail price of bestsellers." Link{Fr}

Yikes!!!!
What Pauline has proposed is more interference by the government in the free market, something that nine times out of ten makes consumers big losers and which enriches special interest groups unfairly.

Of everything Pauline has said, this more than anything else defines the PQ's philosophy of governance, which is state intervention in just about every aspect of our life.

Because the sovereignty and language debate takes up practically all the political air, little or nothing is ever discussed on the issue of these government interventionist policies.

Of course we in Quebec are painfully aware that we are the most heavily taxed citizens in North America and that our salaries are not keeping pace with gains made in other parts of Canada.


As you can see in the chart above, Quebecers make less and pay proportionally more taxes than most other Canadians.
But that is only half the story.
Quebec families, already handicapped by less disposable income, face the double whammy of higher prices in the marketplace, attributed to the high consumer taxes imposed by a desperate government in search of revenues.
Consider just one element, Quebec's 9.5% sales tax as compared to Alberta's 0% tax. This one tax alone can remove an additional $3,000 from the average family wallet, something Albertans don't face at all.

But a third element, the paternalistic desire by government to protect local markets, is another costly element driving down disposable income in Quebec.

Let us start with the very subject Pauline brought up in her speech, French language books, wherein she proposes to protect small book stores from competition from the big box stores that typically sell new arrivals at 20-40% off list price.
For Pauline this 'unfair' competition puts local booksellers at risk, so she proposes that no retailer be allowed to discount these new arrivals for a certain period of time.
Sounds like a plan....

Now anybody who has ever purchased a French language book knows that the prices are very high compared to English versions, no doubt because of the limited printing runs.
Take for example, one of the hottest (no pun intended) bestsellers on the market, 50 Shades of Grey which sells in paperback for $9 at Amazon.com while the French version, Cinquante nuances de Grey, where no paperback is available, sells for $22.99.

Perhaps someone might remind Madame Marois that books are not gasoline, which must be purchased locally.
Unless she intends on telling Amazon.com in the United States that a product may not be sold to Quebecers because of protective pricing, her plan is doomed to failure.
And no, dear readers, she cannot enforce a floor price on Amazon, there is the little problem called NAFTA.

The larger issue is how in good conscience she can raise the price of books that are already astronomically expensive?

Quebec remains North American champion in imposing floor prices, sometimes with perverse effects.
In Quebec,  milk production and retail prices are controlled by the government. The consequence of course, is that consumers in Montreal pay in the neighbourhood of $1.50 per litre, while New Yorkers pay about 78¢, a whopping difference of over 90%!
You can see the minimum prices that the government sets for milk HERE

The same goes for cheese products and especially fresh butter which sells for about $5.75 a pound in Quebec, while in a Costco in the USA, it can be found for $2.00.
The sad part about all this is that Quebec dairy farmers don't really benefit, they've got to pay interest on heavy loans that they needed to take out in order to buy expensive milk production quota.

Read an interesting report written by the Montreal Economic Institute about the problem of supply management in the agricultural field. Download

Minimum prices can only be imposed on those things not easily purchased outside Quebec and so that is why gasoline remains so expensive. Even going across the border makes no sense when you've got to spend time and burn gas just to get it.
And so the Quebec government has always been comfortable charging huge taxes at the pump.

Recently, regular gasoline sold for about $1.25 in Montreal, 99¢ in Calgary and about 77¢ in Miami.
You can see the minimum prices that the government sets for each region HERE

The Quebec government is very protective of small gas stations, making sure they make a profit by ordering a minimum price that no retailer may sell for less, even if they wanted to. I once filled up at the Costco gas pump in St. Jerome and was surprised to see this letter attached to the pump;

Dear, Costco members,

The Regie d'energie of Quebec has recently imposed a 3¢ per litre increase on gasoline sold in St.Jerome.We disagree with this artificial increase imposed on the citizens of St. Jerome for the benefit of gasoline retailers.For this reason, we will be donating 3¢ per litre sold, to the Fondation de l'hopital regional de St. Jerome. 

Costco Wholesale will continue to supply members the very best quality/price value for all their purchases.

Incredibly minimum prices even apply to beer!  Link{fr}

Those who defend this 'Quebec model' always use the argument that Quebecers accept higher prices and higher taxes because the province is more socially responsible and provides citizens more entitlements than the rest of Canada.

The argument might hold water but for the fact that it is simply not true that through taxes, Quebecers themselves fund government programs such as seven dollar-a-day daycare, free prescription medicine, extended family leave, incredibly low tuition for higher education, etc. etc.
If Quebec ran a balanced budget and was not the beneficiary of so many billions in equalization payments, it might be a reasonable and fair societal choice.
But such is not the case, Quebec's nanny state has been largely funded by huge deficit spending and subsidies from other Canadians, something that the majority of Quebecer refuse to acknowledge.

Accepting free money from other Canadians to pay for Quebec entitlements may be one thing, but to ask future generations of Quebecers to pay for today's generation of entitlements is selfishly outrageous. 

 But it appears that this orgy of taxing and spending is drawing towards an ultimate day of reckoning.

In  spite of the spending cuts and tax increases announced by the PQ government in the last budget, there will be no balanced budget in the near future as government revenues aren't keeping pace with the rise in expenditures.

The problem of falling revenues can be attributed to the high taxes and crushing regulations imposed on Quebec's business community. With open borders, companies that are not geographically sensitive, can and will locate where they get the best deal.
Already Quebec is obliged to spend six times more than Ontario (per capita) on handouts to businesses in order to entice them to settle and remain in Quebec.

Recently American retailer TARGET, announced with great fanfare that the company was expanding to Quebec, buying out the failing Zellers chain.
What few in the media were willing to report is that the company set up its giant distribution centre just outside the Quebec border in Cornwall Ontario, in order to avoid Quebec taxes, regulations and yes, language legislation.
They aren't alone, Walmart also does its Quebec distribution through a giant facility in Cornwall.
These are the lost jobs that we see, but the greater tragedy is the tens of thousands of jobs that never were, as companies rule out Quebec as a potential base of operations.

It is these tiny cuts that add up. Here a few hundred jobs, there a few hundred jobs. A head office moves and poof!... perhaps five hundred or a thousand jobs are lost or never created.

And let us not forget the head office and corporate exodus that devastated Quebec in the seventies and eighties. The damage done was inestimable.
Take for example the most famous of these corporations who fled the province, Sun Life of Canada.  Today the 8,000 head office jobs in Ontario means an above-average paycheck supporting over 32,000 families and if we are to add those ancillary jobs created in other companies supporting the Sun Life concern, it amounts to well over 20,000 jobs, enough to support a city of 80,000 people in Quebec.
And in addition to all the money these Sun Life employees spend in their communities, consider all the taxes remitted to the government including income tax, sales tax, property tax, etc. etc.
And that is the story of but one company, the same story has played out a hundred times over.

In the end, we are where we are.
The nanny state that overtaxes and overburdens business with regulation, coupled with repressive language legislation has set Quebec on a course of permanent economic decline. With its high-handed and foolish decision not to offset these job losses by exploiting its fossil fuel wealth, the die is cast.

As Quebec becomes more and more inhospitable to wealth creation, it is inevitable that family income will rise more slowly than in other provinces.
Faced with decreasing salaries and decreasing taxes, the government increases tax rates and jacks up taxes on consumer goods to make up the difference, a disastrous scenario.

And remember, when defenders of the Quebec nanny state tell us that families have less personal resources than in other provinces because of choices about social issues, it is just plain not true. Debt and Canadian largess are to be factored in.

As Quebec reaches its debt and tax ceiling, taxpayers are going to be in for a shock if Ottawa cuts equalization payments significantly (which represents over 10% of the present budget) as is likely the case.

Looking forward to the gathering clouds of debt, overspending and diminished economic activity, it is painfully obvious that we are headed into our very own Perfect Economic Storm

Entitlism and Quebec's Ruling Elite

To contact us Click HERE

Jean-François Lisée, Mr. No-Show

As you probably are aware Jean-François Lisée, a minister in the PQ government recently came under criticism for 'double-dipping,' that is accepting two government paid salaries at the same time.

Lisée is currently paid about $165,000 as a minister in the Quebec government, but was collecting until now, another $8,667 dollars a month from the University of Montreal. 

Within a day or two of the story breaking in la Presse, Lisée renounced the second salary, claiming that although he was entitled to it, he would donate the money to charity. Link

Lisée was hired as directer by the University of Montreal's  Centre d’études et de recherches internationales de l’Université de Montréal (CÉRIUM) in 2004 and because he demanded a salary that the university could not meet (because of university remuneration guidelines,) the school and Lisée concocted what can only be characterized as an unethical and underhanded, yet perfectly legal scheme, to pay him more money than the rules dictated.

The university agreed to credit Lisée a 'thirteenth' month of salary for each year worked, to be paid at the end of his employment as some sort of exit payment, something that did not contravene the letter of the guidelines, but certainly the spirit.
And so when Lisée left the university after eight years, the school as per the agreement, continued to pay his full salary for another eight months.
Those eight months were to carry him until February, 2013.
When all this hit the fan, Lisée decided to donate the future payments to charity, but not what he was already paid, so all we are talking about is the two months of these $8,667 payments, not that big a deal when you consider the taxes owing.

Instead of complaining over the double-dipping, which is entirely legal, nobody has challenged the university or Lisée on the ethics of the whole dirty deal.
It isn't much different from Tony Soprano 'convincing' a construction company to put a couple of his 'boys' on the payroll, without of course, the pesky obligation to show up to work.
Anyway you slice it, it is called a no-show job, a crude shakedown.

And let us remember, Mr. Lisée's $104,000 salary at the university was basically for part-time work. He continued to write for L’actualité magazine and for Le Journal de Montreal, as well as finding the time to write four or five books, as well as appearing on television regularly as a political commentator, as well as hosting his own television show, Planète Terre.TV
Link{Fr}
It seems that Lisée was collecting a salary from every direction, in the true spirit of MUHC consummate gonif Arthur Porter.

Oh and by the way, for his eight years of 'work' at the university, Lisée has earned himself an indexed $28,000 pension for life, which he is eligible to collect later his year!

It is these type of stories of naked greed and entitlement of those at the top of our society, that has those at the bottom asking why they should finance the orgy of entitlement.

Can one really fault students for refusing to accept increased tuition fees when the universities, both English and French engage in deceitful over-spending wherein the top echelon are paid outrageous salaries complete with immoral and unjustifiable pensions.
Before we anglos get on our high horse, Concordia university wins the prize for the most irresponsible board of directors offering the most outrageous severance packages to those in high places.
Think I'm exaggerating? Read this;

As university president, Judith Woodsworth has made an unlikely return to Concordia as a professor, despite having been compensated over $169,573 in “administrative leave pay” to help her get back on her feet.
On Dec. 22, 2010 Woodsworth left the university at the urging of the Board of Governors halfway through her term in office, receiving a $747,045 severance package that stands out as one of the hallmarks of a governance crisis that continues to plague the university. $900K Later, Judy’s Back in the Classroom

But exorbitant exit payments and double-dipping are part of Quebec society and since those who benefit from the practice are those that create the rules, it's easy to understand how we got to the point where a public employee can collect two generous and  indexed pensions, while the poor saps in private industry receive crumbs when they retire.

Let us understand the concept of double-dipping.
It is the act of either having two government or quasi-government jobs at the same time, or more likely, collecting a publicly funded pension (and I don't mean old-age security) at the same time as receiving a paycheck from the government or quasi-government agency.
It also means accepting two distinct publicly-funded pensions at the same time.

Let me give you some examples;

Ex-Premier Jean-Charest will collect a $100,000 plus pension from the Parliament of Canada when he turns 55 later this year.
When he turns sixty, he will be eligible to collect a Quebec government pension for his service in the National Assembly, which also works out to over $100,000 a year.
All this is indexed and so for the rest of his life, Canadian and Quebec taxpayers will be paying out two pensions, the equivalent of over $200,000 towards his retirement. Not bad.....
In fact the two pensions add up annually  to more money than Charest ever earned, even in his best year!
That's double-dipping.

A politician who serves for thirty years in Parliament in Ottawa will collect one pension, while a politician who serves fifteen years in a provincial Parliament, in addition to fifteen years in federal Parliament will collects two pensions and receive about 50% more in combined revenues at age sixty-five.

Consider Mr. Charest, (who I am only using as an example) who after his political career can choose to return to public life, perhaps as a government consultant or a member of the diplomatic corps, thus earning a third source of revenue from the government.
Triple-dipping!.....Call it a Dairy Queen special!

At any rate, let's go on.

There are to my knowledge at least three members of Quebec's National Assembly who are already collecting a publicly paid pension, while being paid to serve as an elected  member.
Guy Ouellette, Robert Poeti and Jacques Duchesneau are all retired law-enforcement officers who are each collecting a very generous, indexed police pension.
In Duchesneau's case, the pension is north of $100,000, according to my calculations.

The third type of double-dipping is what Mr. Lisee was doing, collecting two public salaries, in his case,  one from the university and one from the National Assembly.

But perhaps the most galling type of remunerations are the famous transition payments where some  receive a payment upon termination of employment, regardless whether the recipient was fired or left of his or her own accord.

Now I can accept as reasonable an exit payment paid to a defeated politician whose sole source of revenue is the paycheck received as an elected official. It is rough to know that with each election one can lose his or her job rather abruptly. 
Transitioning out of public life and being forced to find employment can be stressful and a safety net payment providing a replacement income for up to a year can be justified.

But these payments are also offered to public officials who quit their jobs of their own volition, something that is insulting to taxpayers. Some have jobs lined up the next day!

Even disgraced politicians who resign in the face of a public backlash are eligible for up to one year's salary.
And so the indicted ex-mayor of Mascouche, the soon to be indicted ex-mayor of Laval and the never to be indicted (but disgraced) ex-mayor of Montreal will all receive payments of tens of thousands of dollars.

The very worst exit payments that I can think of, were paid to four characters that left their jobs in a cloud of disgrace, having cost taxpayers dearly for their incompetence, mistakes or alleged criminality.

After the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec's financial meltdown in 2009, whereby the public pension plan lost $40 billion dollars, or about 25% of it's value, Henri-Paul Rousseau, its boss, quit to take another position with Power Corporation a few months later.
Despite the utter financial disaster that he oversaw and ignoring the fact that he quit, Rousseau received an exit payment $380,000

Readers might recall the ÃŽlot Voyageur fiasco where costs for the new UQAM building in Montreal exploded from the projected cost of $392 millions to $728 million.

The rector of the university, Roch Denis, was investigated for fraud, but in the end was not charged and the whole affair was charged to incompetence.
He left in disgrace, taking with him an exit payment of $173,000.
The other two UQAM directors who were blamed for the financial disaster by the auditor-general of Quebec also received generous exit payments upon their forced departures. Link{fr}
And remember, these three were responsible for the over $300 million in cost overruns!

And then there is the famous Claude Blanchet, husband of Premier Pauline Marois who as boss of a Société générale de financement (SGF) between 2001 and 2003 ran up losses of  $775 million, this while offering generous bonuses to himself and other highly ranked employees!

When he was shoved out of the job early, he 'negotiated' a sweetheart deal for himself, including a year's salary of $257K and a lifetime pension of $80,000!  Link{fr}

It's a bit ironic that Pauline Marois and the PQ raised a ruckus over the Liberal Party's practice of topping off Jean Charest's salary to the tune of $80K a year, considering that Quebec taxpayers will be paying the indexed pension of $80,000 a year to Pauline's jewel of a husband, a man who headed a dysfunctional agency that blew three quarters of a billion dollars of taxpayers money on his watch, FOR THE REST O HIS LIFE!

As for conclusions, I'll leave that up to readers, in the comment section.

Understanding Quebec's Finances and the new PQ Budget

To contact us Click HERE
The tabling of Quebec's new budget yesterday afternoon, hasn't afforded me the time necessary to study and comment upon it in so short a time.

These documents are complicated and what appears obvious upon first glance, isn't always borne out when the full document is analyzed, which takes time.

There's always a danger that the mainstream media, in an effort to offer instant analysis,  gets the immediate interpretation wrong, the very best example that I can think of is the wholesale misreporting of the US Supreme Court Decision on Obamacare, where many media outlets, including CNN, falsely reported that the court had knocked down the statute when in fact it had done the opposite and upheld the law. Read a story about the blown coverage

I'll look over the budget today and offer an opinion either Friday or Monday, but I thought that it would be very useful to understand what exactly Quebec's budget is, how much the government takes in terms of revenue and how and where it spends the money.
Perhaps with a little better understanding, we can all make better sense of what the current budget changed, for better or for worse.

Here is a high resolution illustration, representing last year's budget, one that clearly shows how much money the governments take in and where the money is spent. Unfortunately, it is available in French only, but it's not so hard to understand.

You can click the picture to enlarge it then drag it to your desktop where you can use a picture viewing software (MAC="Preview") to enlarge it. Because the illustration is such high resolution, even the little, little writing is clear when enlarged.


Before we start analyzing how the Quebec government spends this money, we should have a general idea about how it raises this money.
I'm only going to provide a rough sketch, not wishing to impose information overload, this post is actually meant to give readers some understanding and background on last year's budget spending, so we can better understand the provisions and changes in the new PQ budget tabled yesterday.

The government actually takes in more money than the 73 billion spent, but that difference is placed into special funds, meant to cover specific long term projects, not covered here. We won't discuss those elements here.

Where the Quebec government gets the 73 billion dollars it spends;  

34%.............. personal income taxes and payroll tax levies
17%.............. transfers from Ottawa (equalization and other transfers, etc.)
15%............. provincial sales tax, gas tax, tobacco, licensing etc.
6%.............. dividends from SAQ, Hydro-Quebec, Loto-Quebec
4.5%...........  corporate taxes
7%.............. premium collected (social security, drug plans, etc.)
8%.............. investment income
9%.............. other income
3%.............. deficit
Link to StatsCan

Readers, the numbers above are very approximate....

Now to understand the chart above and how the government spends the 73 billion dollars, follow the spokes radiating out to the various coloured balloons representing a major area of spending. Around that balloon written in the same colour are sub balloons and smaller details describing spending within that sphere.

Let us consider one of the smaller and easy to understand sections, that of "Famille et Aines" (Family and Seniors) the green spoke, radiating out from the center at about the 6:30 position at the bottom.

That green spoke brings us to a bubble that represents $2.4 billion in spending and as you can see from the satellite comments, $2.1 billion of this money is earmarked for daycare and other family care facilities.

Following the same method you can follow all the spending of each major sphere of government expenditures, it's quite interesting.

Health and social services = $29    billion
Education                          = $16     billion
Debt service                       = $8      billion
Municipal affairs               = $3.7    billion 
Employment                      = $4.2    billion

For your information, the royalties on natural resources, something the PQ has announced with great fanfare that it is increasing, is hardly the windfall promised.  Even if Quebec were to charge 50% more, it would raise an additional $600 million at best, not a drop in the bucket, but not a game changer.

And by the way, in my last post I told you that Quebec gives away an amazing $6 billion in subsidies to Quebec business each year, three times more than Ontario does, despite Ontario raising considerably more taxes than Quebec.

You won't find a direct reference to it in the chart above, the subsidy is done through tax credits, whereby taxes to be collected are forgiven. This leads to Quebec corporations to contribute a paltry 4.5% of the 73 billion Quebec budget through corporate taxes.

As for me, I think I pulled away some interesting facts from the chart, the first and most important, the fact that almost half the budget goes to pay for government and quasi-government salaries which go up each year by a couple of percentage points adding a billion or two to the budget each year. The only way to change this is to cut down on the size of the civil service.

This reminds me of the best advice my late father ever gave me, which was that it is more important to watch what you spend rather than what you make.
Living within your means, and putting a little aside is a sure road map to prosperity.  In tough times, spend less.
It makes sense, even for a government.

As for services like subsidized day care, reduced tuition fees, I am not against these programs on principle, but object that they are universal, meaning everyone rich or poor gets the same benefit.

The idea that a lawyer in a BMW can pull up to a public subsidized daycare (an urban myth?) and drop off her child there for $7 a day is galling.

As for tuition, let me tell you my personal story.
My son was accepted to a medical school in the USA which informed us in the acceptance letter that tuition was $40,000 per year, to be paid up front.

When he was finally accepted to medical school in Montreal, I almost choked at the low tuition of about $5,000 per year, what a bargain!
As a successful businessman I certainly could have paid a lot more than that and I would have done so  gladly, without begrudging students from less fortunate circumstances paying a much reduced rate.

I'm not against enhanced government services, I'm against universality.

A solid tweak to these programs can make them socially and financially responsible, but hey, that's just one man's opinion.
What is yours?

Quebec's Nanny State Running out of Gas

To contact us Click HERE
In her  inaugural  speech as Premier of Quebec, Pauline Marois outlined her government's plan for the next legislative session and while the media focused on her agenda of fighting corruption and strengthening language legislation, buried among the more controversial themes was this bizarre statement that caused hardly a ripple in the press.

"A parliamentary commission will be created to study the relevance and impact of a law which would regulate book prices. The Government wishes to support authors, publishers and booksellers from Quebec who can not compete against the big box stores that offer discounts from 25% to 30% off the suggested retail price of bestsellers." Link{Fr}

Yikes!!!!
What Pauline has proposed is more interference by the government in the free market, something that nine times out of ten makes consumers big losers and which enriches special interest groups unfairly.

Of everything Pauline has said, this more than anything else defines the PQ's philosophy of governance, which is state intervention in just about every aspect of our life.

Because the sovereignty and language debate takes up practically all the political air, little or nothing is ever discussed on the issue of these government interventionist policies.

Of course we in Quebec are painfully aware that we are the most heavily taxed citizens in North America and that our salaries are not keeping pace with gains made in other parts of Canada.


As you can see in the chart above, Quebecers make less and pay proportionally more taxes than most other Canadians.
But that is only half the story.
Quebec families, already handicapped by less disposable income, face the double whammy of higher prices in the marketplace, attributed to the high consumer taxes imposed by a desperate government in search of revenues.
Consider just one element, Quebec's 9.5% sales tax as compared to Alberta's 0% tax. This one tax alone can remove an additional $3,000 from the average family wallet, something Albertans don't face at all.

But a third element, the paternalistic desire by government to protect local markets, is another costly element driving down disposable income in Quebec.

Let us start with the very subject Pauline brought up in her speech, French language books, wherein she proposes to protect small book stores from competition from the big box stores that typically sell new arrivals at 20-40% off list price.
For Pauline this 'unfair' competition puts local booksellers at risk, so she proposes that no retailer be allowed to discount these new arrivals for a certain period of time.
Sounds like a plan....

Now anybody who has ever purchased a French language book knows that the prices are very high compared to English versions, no doubt because of the limited printing runs.
Take for example, one of the hottest (no pun intended) bestsellers on the market, 50 Shades of Grey which sells in paperback for $9 at Amazon.com while the French version, Cinquante nuances de Grey, where no paperback is available, sells for $22.99.

Perhaps someone might remind Madame Marois that books are not gasoline, which must be purchased locally.
Unless she intends on telling Amazon.com in the United States that a product may not be sold to Quebecers because of protective pricing, her plan is doomed to failure.
And no, dear readers, she cannot enforce a floor price on Amazon, there is the little problem called NAFTA.

The larger issue is how in good conscience she can raise the price of books that are already astronomically expensive?

Quebec remains North American champion in imposing floor prices, sometimes with perverse effects.
In Quebec,  milk production and retail prices are controlled by the government. The consequence of course, is that consumers in Montreal pay in the neighbourhood of $1.50 per litre, while New Yorkers pay about 78¢, a whopping difference of over 90%!
You can see the minimum prices that the government sets for milk HERE

The same goes for cheese products and especially fresh butter which sells for about $5.75 a pound in Quebec, while in a Costco in the USA, it can be found for $2.00.
The sad part about all this is that Quebec dairy farmers don't really benefit, they've got to pay interest on heavy loans that they needed to take out in order to buy expensive milk production quota.

Read an interesting report written by the Montreal Economic Institute about the problem of supply management in the agricultural field. Download

Minimum prices can only be imposed on those things not easily purchased outside Quebec and so that is why gasoline remains so expensive. Even going across the border makes no sense when you've got to spend time and burn gas just to get it.
And so the Quebec government has always been comfortable charging huge taxes at the pump.

Recently, regular gasoline sold for about $1.25 in Montreal, 99¢ in Calgary and about 77¢ in Miami.
You can see the minimum prices that the government sets for each region HERE

The Quebec government is very protective of small gas stations, making sure they make a profit by ordering a minimum price that no retailer may sell for less, even if they wanted to. I once filled up at the Costco gas pump in St. Jerome and was surprised to see this letter attached to the pump;

Dear, Costco members,

The Regie d'energie of Quebec has recently imposed a 3¢ per litre increase on gasoline sold in St.Jerome.We disagree with this artificial increase imposed on the citizens of St. Jerome for the benefit of gasoline retailers.For this reason, we will be donating 3¢ per litre sold, to the Fondation de l'hopital regional de St. Jerome. 

Costco Wholesale will continue to supply members the very best quality/price value for all their purchases.

Incredibly minimum prices even apply to beer!  Link{fr}

Those who defend this 'Quebec model' always use the argument that Quebecers accept higher prices and higher taxes because the province is more socially responsible and provides citizens more entitlements than the rest of Canada.

The argument might hold water but for the fact that it is simply not true that through taxes, Quebecers themselves fund government programs such as seven dollar-a-day daycare, free prescription medicine, extended family leave, incredibly low tuition for higher education, etc. etc.
If Quebec ran a balanced budget and was not the beneficiary of so many billions in equalization payments, it might be a reasonable and fair societal choice.
But such is not the case, Quebec's nanny state has been largely funded by huge deficit spending and subsidies from other Canadians, something that the majority of Quebecer refuse to acknowledge.

Accepting free money from other Canadians to pay for Quebec entitlements may be one thing, but to ask future generations of Quebecers to pay for today's generation of entitlements is selfishly outrageous. 

 But it appears that this orgy of taxing and spending is drawing towards an ultimate day of reckoning.

In  spite of the spending cuts and tax increases announced by the PQ government in the last budget, there will be no balanced budget in the near future as government revenues aren't keeping pace with the rise in expenditures.

The problem of falling revenues can be attributed to the high taxes and crushing regulations imposed on Quebec's business community. With open borders, companies that are not geographically sensitive, can and will locate where they get the best deal.
Already Quebec is obliged to spend six times more than Ontario (per capita) on handouts to businesses in order to entice them to settle and remain in Quebec.

Recently American retailer TARGET, announced with great fanfare that the company was expanding to Quebec, buying out the failing Zellers chain.
What few in the media were willing to report is that the company set up its giant distribution centre just outside the Quebec border in Cornwall Ontario, in order to avoid Quebec taxes, regulations and yes, language legislation.
They aren't alone, Walmart also does its Quebec distribution through a giant facility in Cornwall.
These are the lost jobs that we see, but the greater tragedy is the tens of thousands of jobs that never were, as companies rule out Quebec as a potential base of operations.

It is these tiny cuts that add up. Here a few hundred jobs, there a few hundred jobs. A head office moves and poof!... perhaps five hundred or a thousand jobs are lost or never created.

And let us not forget the head office and corporate exodus that devastated Quebec in the seventies and eighties. The damage done was inestimable.
Take for example the most famous of these corporations who fled the province, Sun Life of Canada.  Today the 8,000 head office jobs in Ontario means an above-average paycheck supporting over 32,000 families and if we are to add those ancillary jobs created in other companies supporting the Sun Life concern, it amounts to well over 20,000 jobs, enough to support a city of 80,000 people in Quebec.
And in addition to all the money these Sun Life employees spend in their communities, consider all the taxes remitted to the government including income tax, sales tax, property tax, etc. etc.
And that is the story of but one company, the same story has played out a hundred times over.

In the end, we are where we are.
The nanny state that overtaxes and overburdens business with regulation, coupled with repressive language legislation has set Quebec on a course of permanent economic decline. With its high-handed and foolish decision not to offset these job losses by exploiting its fossil fuel wealth, the die is cast.

As Quebec becomes more and more inhospitable to wealth creation, it is inevitable that family income will rise more slowly than in other provinces.
Faced with decreasing salaries and decreasing taxes, the government increases tax rates and jacks up taxes on consumer goods to make up the difference, a disastrous scenario.

And remember, when defenders of the Quebec nanny state tell us that families have less personal resources than in other provinces because of choices about social issues, it is just plain not true. Debt and Canadian largess are to be factored in.

As Quebec reaches its debt and tax ceiling, taxpayers are going to be in for a shock if Ottawa cuts equalization payments significantly (which represents over 10% of the present budget) as is likely the case.

Looking forward to the gathering clouds of debt, overspending and diminished economic activity, it is painfully obvious that we are headed into our very own Perfect Economic Storm