Latest news with #PaulSt-PierrePlamondon
Montreal Gazette
4 days ago
- Politics
- Montreal Gazette
Drimonis: Youth crime is serious. Blaming immigration is laughable
In a recent television interview, Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon attempted to establish a direct link between immigration and the involvement of minors in crimes. 'Immigrant criminal groups are bringing new and especially aggressive methods to Quebec,' he stated. '(Gangs have) names like Arab Power, so there's no doubt about their ethnocultural affiliation. Recruitment is done on an ethnocultural basis.' The PQ leader's main concern, he said, lies with street gangs' recruitment efforts primarily targeting minors, in light of a recent report showing a third of homicides in Quebec this year have involved young people age 21 and under. His concerns aren't entirely unfounded. Gangs are indeed luring younger and younger victims into their fold. Montreal's Maghrebi community already raised the alarm about criminals recruiting their youth. There's nothing wrong with a political leader reacting to an uptick in violence, seeking solutions. Choosing to frame it as an issue linked to immigration, though, is problematic. And selective. It's not like homegrown gangs with violent track records haven't been operating in Quebec for decades, or like we don't have our own share of locally produced groups messing with the public's sense of security. Just weeks ago, four men were arrested in an alleged terrorist plot. As suggested by their names alone — Marc-Aurèle Chabot, Simon Angers-Audet, Raphaël Lagacé and Matthew Forbes — they're from the far-away, exotic land of Quebec. Canada has a creeping far-right extremism problem, and Quebec is not exempt. Yet, to my recollection, I've never heard the PQ leader express concerns about groups like the Fédération des Québécois de souche, Pégida Québec, La Meute or Storm Alliance. Perhaps their names elicit less terror than Arab Power, which St-Pierre Plamondon took pains to mention in his interview. Why the specific focus on the above group, while the Hells Angels have reportedly been associated with gangs recruiting minors for decades? And why is the fact that gang recruitment is made on an ethnocultural basis suddenly concerning to the PQ leader? This phenomenon is neither new nor introduced by recent Arab immigration. The West End Gang, Rock Machine, the Montreal Mafia and the Hells Angels have often recruited on an ethnonationalist basis and have long wreaked violence in this province. Yves (Apache) Trudeau, Georges (Bo-Boy) Beaulieu, Maurice (Mom) Boucher and St-Henri's infamous Dubois Brothers all sound very, how shall we say, homegrown. Criminal gangs often do have an ethnonationalist element. But the common denominators in most cases of gang violence are societal alienation, poverty and lack of opportunity. Not immigration. Taking very real problems — the recruitment of young people into gangs and the rise of criminality among minors — and using them to imply that demographic changes are the culprit is not an evidence-based finding. It didn't take long for right-wing pundits to call St-Pierre Plamondon 'brave' for 'daring to state the obvious: mass immigration has contributed to insecurity.' Politically opportunistic rhetoric flings the door wide open to those desperately wanting to link multiculturalism or a rise in immigration to a rise in criminality. Something that's blatantly untrue. Numerous studies, including a 2023 McGill-led study, show that immigrants are neither predisposed to more crime nor tied to an increase in crime rates. Mentioning immigration only when you want to link it to a slew of ills Quebec is suffering from is problematic. A lack of affordable housing? Immigration. Quebec's low birth rate? Immigration. An increase in gang violence? Immigration. This dog-whistling can be perniciously subtle, allowing people's inherent confirmation bias to fill in gaps and interpret a link that supports their pre-existing beliefs. It's helpful to no one, except perhaps politicians wishing to capitalize on fear.
Montreal Gazette
11-08-2025
- Politics
- Montreal Gazette
Opinion: Another Quebec referendum? If so, let's enforce a clear question this time
Op Eds Although a majority of Quebecers might wish otherwise, the Parti Québécois could very well win the Oct. 5, 2026 provincial election, along with a mandate to hold a third referendum on separation. That is a scenario many of us would rather not think about, but we must prepare nonetheless. How? First, changes should be brought to the Quebec Referendum Act so that, if another referendum is indeed held, the question will be crystal clear. We all know the 1980 and 1995 questions were confusing. Does anyone doubt this was intentional? We must not allow it to happen again. There are precedents. The question in the 2014 referendum in Scotland was: 'Should Scotland be an independent country?' For the Brexit consultation in 2016: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?' Closer to home, in Alberta, a group of separatists have submitted the following text: 'Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?' All those questions are perfectly clear and not slanted in any way. If such an approach is good for the U.K., Scotland and Alberta, why would Quebec separatists be able to impose a convoluted question, so that voters are confused into voting for something they do not really want? Currently, Clause 8 of the Referendum Act gives the governing party the arbitrary power to write the question and vote it by a simple majority in the National Assembly. Therefore, a PQ majority government would be allowed to decide — once again on its own — one of the most important rules of the game. This is neither fair nor democratic. The Act should be amended so that all political parties recognized in the National Assembly must approve the text of the question. The PQ would oppose such a change, but I have no doubt most Quebecers would be in favour, because they are democrats. This is something the Legault government, with its majority in parliament, and certainly the support of the Liberals, can do right away. Amending the Referendum Act is not the only thing federalists can do to prepare. Paul St-Pierre Plamondon seems to be popular among Quebecers in large part because he appears reasonable and rational. The impression is that he does politics differently. In fact, he is arguably the most extreme leader the PQ has ever had. St-Pierre Plamondon believes, sincerely it appears, that independence will magically solve all the problems the province faces. He envisages that an independent Quebec would abandon the Canadian dollar in favour of a Quebec currency. He never talks about an association with the rest of Canada; his project is a radical break, not René Lévesque's sovereignty-association. Consistent with this 'rational' approach, the PQ will publish, in the next few months, a 'blue paper' on separation. Federalists should be ready to respond to each and every argument put forward by this document. Remember that two years ago, the party issued a 'Year One budget' that was lauded by many commentators as a rigorous report. A few months later, three economists and I showed how, in fact, the text grossly underestimates the costs of independence. This is the type of work that must be done, starting now: challenging the separatist agenda at every corner. Many might think that such a strategy is premature, that even if the Péquistes win the election next year, they will face the reality that most Quebecers do not want another referendum. However, the 1995 referendum here and the 2016 Brexit consultation showed that once the referendum ball starts rolling, anything can happen. In other words, waiting is a losing strategy. For those of us who want Quebec and Canada to win, now is not too soon to begin preparing. This story was originally published August 6, 2025 at 6:55 AM.
Montreal Gazette
31-05-2025
- Politics
- Montreal Gazette
Libman: Referendum pledge puts PQ leader in a bind
Last week's Léger poll on provincial sovereignty in Canada contained an eye-popping revelation: Among all provinces, Quebec had the greatest proportion of respondents 'opposed' to separation, at 59 per cent. Support for sovereignty was tagged at 33 per cent, near where it's been hovering for years. It's lower than support in Manitoba/Saskatchewan and well behind the 41 per cent in Alberta. Ontario was at 31 per cent. Having the highest number against sovereignty was explained by the fact that most Quebecers are already decided on the question, while in other provinces there were more who didn't answer. With a Quebec election next year, this is a warning light on Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon's dashboard, putting him in a tight spot. After the separatist party suffered its worst defeat in its history, reduced to just three seats, PSPP had to consolidate the PQ base — and he defiantly committed to holding a sovereignty referendum in his first term if elected. Despite being numerically marginalized in the National Assembly, the PQ MNAs were able to generate catchy headlines, like refusing to swear allegiance to the King in the oath of office, which was subsequently changed. As voters grew weary of François Legault and his Coalition Avenir Québec government, combined with a weakened and leaderless Liberal party, the PQ suddenly found itself leading in polls as the default option where Quebecers were parking their vote, and has led ever since. The commitment to a sovereignty referendum, however, could become the PQ's biggest hurdle in transforming its current lead into a victory in next year's election. We're entering an unpredictable political maze now in Quebec, with polls containing many ifs, ands or buts: The CAQ is seemingly in free fall. Will Legault be pushed to resign, with the hope for a momentous turnaround like the federal Liberals? The Quebec Liberal Party support among francophone voters is only 10 per cent. Will its new leader — to be chosen in two weeks — be able to change that? The PQ leads the polls with 33 per cent support, but 30 per cent of its own voters are against separation — and only 24 per cent of Quebecers think PSPP would make the best premier. PSPP has had a fairly easy ride so far in opposition, left free to launch his attacks. But as federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has learned, that's different from positioning yourself as leader of a government. And the leadership question will only draw more attention as the election comes into sharper focus. Just last week PSPP was on the defensive for taking the populist position that Quebec should lower its carbon pricing — then was pressured to answer to environmental concerns and where he would account for the $1.5-billion shortfall in government revenues. PSPP generated more headlines this week with a motion calling to cut ties with the monarchy, criticizing what many saw as an archaic spectacle in Ottawa and ridiculing the notion that having King Charles read the throne speech would impress U.S. President Donald Trump as an expression of Canadian sovereignty. Many, particularly Quebecers, believe that clinging to the monarchy is a wasteful expense in this day and age. But calling the monarchy hostile toward Quebec and francophones, which PSPP also levelled at Mark Carney, comes across as foolish rhetorical excess. In the recent federal election, a majority of Quebec voters saw Carney as the adult in the room. They want stability and poise during these uncertain times with Trump in the White House. The turbulent prospect of another Quebec sovereignty referendum would bring the opposite. Once chosen, the next Quebec Liberal leader should immediately start hounding PSPP on if and when he would call a referendum, which most Quebecers decidedly don't want. Will he back down, or will the PQ's raison d'être again become its biggest obstacle to power?
Calgary Herald
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
Chris Selley: Central Canadians are practically goading Alberta to consider separation
Article content Of all the problems Canada faces in 2025, the prospect of Alberta sovereigntists winning a referendum and plunging the country into constitutional hell does not appear to be one of them. A Postmedia-Leger poll released last week, found just 29 per cent of Albertans supported the province 'becoming a country independent of Canada,' which is what the straightforward referendum question recently proposed by the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) would ask. That's even fewer than the 36 per cent of Quebecers who would vote Yes in their own sovereignty referendum, according to a Leger poll released before last month's federal election. Article content Article content But good grief, Central Canada could hardly be doing more to try to pump the APP's tires. Ironically, that includes some Quebec separatists. Article content Article content Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon has offered support, in principle: 'I totally agree with provinces that stand up, that are loyal to their own parliament, that are capable of showing a strong hand,' he said earlier this month. This seems like the only logical strategic position for Quebec sovereigntists to take if — like the PQ, which is in pole position to win the next provincial election — they're actually planning on holding and winning a referendum and commencing divorce proceedings with Ottawa, the other provinces and First Nations. Article content Others in the Quebec sovereignty movement, however, haven't been able to resist broadcasting their contempt for Alberta. Legalities aside, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet averred earlier this month, a proper sovereignty-seeking entity 'has to have a culture of their own.' Article content Article content 'I am not certain that oil and gas qualifies to define a culture,' he added disdainfully. Article content Article content 'In Quebec, we have a nation, a language, a culture, a distinct history,' Marie-Anne Alepin, president of the arch-nationalist Société St-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal, told The Canadian Press earlier this month. 'They want an oil-based future. We have no common goals. We're not alike.' Article content But in this respect, we're almost seeing a national-unity moment among Central Canadian elites — sovereigntist and federalist, Upper and Lower Canadian alike — with respect to Alberta.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Chris Selley: Central Canadians are practically goading Alberta to consider separation
Of all the problems Canada faces in 2025, the prospect of Alberta sovereigntists winning a referendum and plunging the country into constitutional hell does not appear to be one of them. A Postmedia-Leger poll released last week, found just 29 per cent of Albertans supported the province 'becoming a country independent of Canada,' which is what the straightforward referendum question recently proposed by the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) would ask. That's even fewer than the 36 per cent of Quebecers who would vote Yes in their own sovereignty referendum, according to a Leger poll released before last month's federal election. But good grief, Central Canada could hardly be doing more to try to pump the APP's tires. Ironically, that includes some Quebec separatists. Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon has offered support, in principle: 'I totally agree with provinces that stand up, that are loyal to their own parliament, that are capable of showing a strong hand,' he said earlier this month. This seems like the only logical strategic position for Quebec sovereigntists to take if — like the PQ, which is in pole position to win the next provincial election — they're actually planning on holding and winning a referendum and commencing divorce proceedings with Ottawa, the other provinces and First Nations. Others in the Quebec sovereignty movement, however, haven't been able to resist broadcasting their contempt for Alberta. Legalities aside, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet averred earlier this month, a proper sovereignty-seeking entity 'has to have a culture of their own.' 'I am not certain that oil and gas qualifies to define a culture,' he added disdainfully. 'In Quebec, we have a nation, a language, a culture, a distinct history,' Marie-Anne Alepin, president of the arch-nationalist Société St-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal, told The Canadian Press earlier this month. 'They want an oil-based future. We have no common goals. We're not alike.' Alepin and Blanchet appear to be offside Quebec popular opinion on the oil-and-gas question: 61 per cent of Quebec respondents to a SOM poll for La Presse, conducted in February, said they supported resuscitating a liquified natural gas project in the province, and 59 per cent said they supported resuscitating the Energy East pipeline, which would have sent oil from Western Canada through Quebec to Irving's Canaport facility in Saint John, N.B. But in this respect, we're almost seeing a national-unity moment among Central Canadian elites — sovereigntist and federalist, Upper and Lower Canadian alike — with respect to Alberta. 'Perhaps it's time Alberta does go it alone and says goodbye to Canada,' a recent Toronto Star headline proposed. 'The province stands alone in its incurable sense of grievance with the rest of the federation,' columnist David Olive wrote — which is an altogether astonishing thing to say about a country that includes Quebec. 'Absent Alberta, Canada could confront Trumpism as a more united front,' Olive argued. 'And Canadian taxpayers would no longer have to subsidize Alberta's oilpatch, its increased housing supply, and its university research projects.' In February, the Star declined to run an idiotic editorial cartoon by Theo Moudakis that proposed Canada swap Alberta for California. But Moudakis posted it on X anyway, with 'Toronto Star' included in his signature. This mirrored Justin Trudeau's idiotic claimed remark to President Donald Trump that Canada might negotiate 'a trade for Vermont or California.' Joke or not, Trudeau didn't need to say what he was thinking of 'trading.' (California is very much in the oil-and-gas industry, incidentally. And Vermont has some of the looser gun laws in the United States. But facts have little purchase when anglophone Central Canadian nationalism — which is to say anti-Americanism — kicks in.) 'I can assure you. No Canadian passport, no citizenship, no pension, and no future if you want to leave Canada,' Senator Kristopher Wells wrote Monday in an extraordinary missive on social media. It has been a common topic of dumb online conversation: Could Albertans keep their Canadian citizenship, as the separatist camp promises? The answer is, of course they could. We allow dual citizenship. We don't revoke citizenship when people move away from Canada, even if it's forever. We grant citizenship to people who have never set foot on Canadian soil, and to anyone who's born on it — even if their parents are just here for a couple of weeks for that exact purpose. Dumb online conversation usually doesn't matter. But Wells is a Trudeau-appointed senator … for Alberta. Not only does Central Canada hate us, the separatists can argue, but the people Central Canada appoints to represent us hate us. These are precisely the sort of comments Quebec separatists try to leverage to convince Quebecers that the Rest of Canada hates them — except, of course, Central Canadian elites would never say such things about Quebecers. It hasn't worked for Quebec separatists. It doesn't seem to be working for Alberta separatists. But all this sneering could do an awful lot of damage to national unity along the way. National Post cselley@ Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what's really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here. Everything you need to know about the threat of Alberta separatism 'This is about the economy': What motivates Alberta separatists
