Popped out to see the casserole demo at the corner of St-Denis and Jarry, which carried on for awhile, then there were cheers as a march came down St-Denis with the big banner you’ll see in the video: VILLERAY DÉSOBÉIT. Most of the demonstrators joined the march.
It’s just an ipod video made on the fly.
Patrick Lagacé has some thoughts on the neighbourhood demos and what they might mean.
A gambling site based in Kahnawake is offering odds on various student strike outcomes.
Le Devoir says Michelle Courchesne will talk if the tuition hike moratorium is off the table while the CBC says she will talk if Bill 78 is off the table. If either of those things is true, I’d say Courchesne has to accept that this can’t be about keeping the upper hand or showing the students who’s boss, because frankly we’ve seen the results of that kind of attitude and we know it doesn’t work. FEUQ and FECQ are no longer holding out for the suspension of Bill 78 before they’ll talk.
Since Bill 78 has to be made to pay something, CLASSE may be fined for Tuesday’s demo, because they never submitted a route to the police and this CTV piece suggests Courchesne is wavering on accepting CLASSE’s presence at any talks because they “encourage people to break the law.”
I guess they should come arrest me too, then: I was among the thousands who took the unsanctioned route west along Sherbrooke and down Peel Street Tuesday afternoon.
“I was among the thousands who took the unsanctioned route west along Sherbrooke and down Peel Street Tuesday afternoon.”
If CLASSE gets fined, it’s gonna go to the supreme court.
ANY action on this idiotic bill will. If you hear a dripping sound, it’s a thousand young lawyers drooling over a pro-bono Supreme Court case that has a good chance of winning & establishing their careers,
@Kate, Bill 78 wouldn’t be on the books if it weren’t for the student uprising. I think it’s great that you were out standing up against an obviously unjust law. But where were you when I attended the anti Bill 101 rally last year? I suppose it’s hard for me to have sympathy with regards to constitutional rights being trampled on when as an Anglo Quebecer mine have been virtually disregarded my entire life. My taxes pay for language police and now I have to pay for extra police to respond to manifestations perpetrated by the same people who want me to subsidize their tuition? People like GND will grow up to tell me to parlez en Francais SVP and deny my kids jobs unless they parlez blanche.
I’m sorry but I don’t care to support White-Franco dominance paid for by the same people they would aim to oppress.
Bill 101 is ingrained in this society, you might as well demonstrate against the climate. You have to decide whether you’re willing to live within its limits, or go live somewhere else.
@mdblog
The bill 101, while undemocratic, and yes it sux, is pretty unrelated to the student/loi78 issue. And Quebec is majority white, majority French. But you know, the young people will remember all the West Island anglophones drooling over the gazette and being hateful against the students — sadly the anglophones missed the chance to make this movement bilingual, and work against the stereotypes that anglophones are just a bunch of neo-liberals with an ROC mentality.
@Kate
What a cop out! I expected better from you. One could say the same thing to the students. Thanks by the way for showing me the door to a place that my family has lived in for 140 years. I suppose if I disagree I have no rights in your eyes; best I just submit to authority. You aren’t against Bill 78. You are Bill 78.
@ant6n
Let them remember their own version of history as they have always done. Their xenophobic policies and culture are/is ultimately self-destructive. At least you acknowledge the stereotypes against Anglos in Quebec, even if you support them. What pray tell, is the ROC mentality?
@mdblog
I think Kate’s just saying that it will be pretty hard to try to build a consensus against bill 101. I do agree with you though (and against Kate for once ;-), that an an attitude of “if you don’t like it go Russia” is not going to solve anything. The exodus of anglophones, and that so many people didn’t feel welcome in the province their parents were born in, is very unfortunate, so is your obvious resignation when it comes to Quebec…. but then again, all kinda unrelated to the students issue.
@mdblog: I am not Bill 78. That’s bullshit and spoken from anger, but please do not go on the attack in that way. A statement like that can’t be countered, it’s just anger flying around.
I don’t like having to say “love it or leave it” but bill 101 is sacrosanct. It might be changed again in 45 or 50 years’ time but I doubt it will be changed in our working lifetimes. We have to accept that fact and either decide we want to live here and can live with it, or decide we need to proceed with our lives and careers away from it. People are always moving around the world to find better opportunities and get away from inconvenient laws – I don’t think choosing to leave Quebec is a special case.
Don’t think I don’t understand the position you’re taking on 101. But that’s not the issue here: you can’t say “why fight injustice X if you’re not prepared to put the same effort into fighting injustice Y?” The world is full of injustices, you fight the ones that you can fight in the time you have.
Its OK to be racist towards minorities and to force them into the mould but heaven forbid we try to bring tuition up by the price of two Starbucks coffees per week…
@Kate
It’s disheartening to be asked to be resigned to one’s fate. I feel the same way about Bill 101 as I do about Bill 178. At least Bill 178 will be struck down and/or expire next year. I doubt the notwithstanding clause will be used here as it would be political suicide for whichever party tried to use it.
I don’t expect you to understand because you come from both of the founding linguistic groups, which gives you a privileged position in this society, whereas my family came from the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. None of my ancestors spoke English or French but we became Canadian anyways.
Asking me to leave; suggesting it, encouraging it, is just hurtful and shows just how un-Canadian this province has become. Quebec used to BE Canada for all intents and purposes. Remember, no other province would have dared to try to enact a law like Bill 178. Quebec did it because they thought that because they got away with Bill 101 that they could do the same thing here; except they were wrong. So you see, Bill 101 and Bill 178 are related. They came for the Anglos and I said nothing…
mdblog – I think you may have a typo; 178 instead of 78.
Freudian slip. :)
mdblog, it looks like you have a problem with all the white franco power out there. Is it this hegemonic group that controls our banks, media, and sends us off to war? Do we need to keep this particular ethnic mafia in our sites? Maybe we should ask Goldman Sachs/Koch brothers/Exxon to help us bring pack power to the little guy like you and me?
I claim ignorance on knowledge of the law, but could someone with some legal knowledge explain how 78 violates our rights? I imagine from the government’s perspective, they haven’t limited the ability to protest or gather, they have just added restrictions (for which there are numerous precedents, even in Canada).
What argument would a lawyer use to fight this position?
“they haven’t limited the ability to protest or gather, they have just added restrictions” Well, yes and no. For one thing, many of those restrictions are prohibited by the charter of Rights & Freedoms – there are limitations on freedom of association in bill 78, and the legislated limitations on when and how a protest can occur are in some cases in violation of freedom of expression (as defined in the Charter). Check out this article for some specific issues from a legal perspective: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/There+doubt+Quebec+back+school+violates+charter+lawyer/6665551/story.html
mdblog says to me: I don’t expect you to understand because you come from both of the founding linguistic groups
I don’t know why you make this assumption. My ancestry is Irish and English but some of my family have been in Montreal since 1840. I have no French ancestry. I grew up in an English-speaking household and am old enough to have gone to school in English – actually, I would’ve had charter rights to go to school in English anyway – so although I speak French now, anyone can tell I’m an anglo. I’ll never sound like I grew up playing stickball in Hochelaga or going to confession at Saint-Viateur.
This hasn’t really helped my chances in life, I’m aware of that, but due to how my personal biographical stuff intersected historical fact, I still live here.
Your assumption I have French ancestry seems to imply that this is why I “don’t understand” Bill 101. I can’t convince you I do. But I also had to come to terms with how solidly the charter of the French language has become the rock on which modern Quebec society is based. I could batter myself to death on it (I’ve seen some people try) but it would end up defining me – and defining this blog. And when I started this blog I made a very clear decision it wasn’t going to be an angryphone blog.
Where is your anti-101 blog, if maintaining an anti-101 stance is so important?
Thanks Ian…much appreciated. It sounds like the restrictions on protesting are not that big of an issue but more the restricting of teachers to associate and the large fines against student associations. Will be interesting to see if any charges are actually laid.
I also asked above, but does anyone know what are the consequences for those arrested??
paul, I think it’s mostly fines. CBC noontime news says most people were fined and let go, a few were given more serious criminal charges (connected with vandalism or assault – i.e. throwing things at police) and will probably have court dates later.
Thanks Kate
Tuesday’s big demo felt like a huge crowd, quite possibly the biggest single protest Montreal has ever seen. Fagstein has made a good honest try at counting the participants, although he admits that he probably didn’t see a significant part of the march. But he compares his estimate, that of the folks in the TVA copter, and that of a commenter counting people off on Sherbrooke Street: it’s a safe guess somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 people is a ballpark figure, but when protests split up, move around different parts of town and re-merge later, it makes even rough head counts next to impossible.
The biggest demo I’ve attended before this was on February 16, 2003 when an estimated 150,000 people marched against the impending attack on Iraq. That demo was held in –20°C weather, but people move so differently under those conditions that I’m unable to guess which was the bigger gathering.
@ Ephraim: “Come with a real solution that doesn’t cost the taxpayers of this province money and won’t ruin the universities.”
Okay. Get rid of all the useless administration positions at our universities (especially the Anglo ones) and stop paying the mafia to build superhighways and superbridges.
Or… are you looking for a solution that continues to pay unscrupulous mafia types to do next to nothing?
At least in 2003 it was for a good cause.
Oh, so you support bill 78, then, Spock? Because under its rules, there will be no more huge demos.
@qatzelok – you just never miss a chance to get in a dig at the anglos, eh? You do realize this entire mess is because of the regressive policies of one M. Charest, who as I last recall is pretty darn French.
Yes I support Bill 78.
So?
@Ian @qatzelok
No no, the superhighway mess is because one M. Bouchard slashed budgets for Transport Quebec and provincial road maintenance, resulting in the deaths of several people.
As for the anglo universities, a strong argument could be made that those admin positions are paid for by all the donations alumni make, since the 3 anglo universities get 2-3 times as much in donations as all of Quebec’s french universities combined.
@Spock I point this out because if you support bill 78, even demos for a “good cause” (presumably meaning ones you agree with) would be suppressed. That’s the thing about bill 78; the law applies to everyone in Quebec, not just the carré rouge activists.
@ Kevin/Ian: This wasn’t an attack on “anglos.” It was an attack on the bloated administrations of the Anglo universities – something I’m familiar with because I worked for one of them. This is where all the money goes: to back-scratching positions in gold-plated cubicles. French (in France) universities have minimal admin, and this is why they have money for free tuition and books. Concordia and McGill are heavily in bed with mafia (Concordia) and the 1% (McGill).
While I’m not surprised to hear this, I’d be very surprised to hear it wasn’t true of UQAM and UdeM as well… I think bloated admin is common to all Quebec universities, and agree that some housecleaning would go a long way to more effective budgetary allocation.
@qatzelok
You should have just said universities. Yes the BOG at Con U are a bunch of idiots, but it was the admin at UQAM that bankrupted the school and forced the government to bail it out because of a horrible idea.
As for France, they may have free tuition, but their entrance exams are much tougher than we have here: which is why thousands of of Frenchmen and women come here to study.
There are problems in universities across Quebec, and nobody denies that. It’s just that there are problems with everything. That’s the way the world works.
@ Kevin: “As for France, they may have free tuition, but their entrance exams are much tougher than we have here: which is why thousands of of Frenchmen and women come here to study.”
So you have to be smart in France, but in the Anglosphere, you need to have upper class parents? This isn’t how “the world” works. It’s how our Anglo mafias work. They aren’t the world, they’re actually ruining the real world.
Nice bit of irony as CLASSE co-leader Jeanne Reynolds receives the lieutenant-governor’s medal, the highest distinction offered to CÉGEP students.
FEUQ says no talks till Bill 78 is rolled back and Michelle Courchesne says no talks unless students agree in advance that a tuition hike moratorium is off the table – so yeah, no talks.
We need facilities to recall our politicians
Who’s there to talk to? Last time they got an “agreement” it was hours before the students walked away from their part of the agreement. There is no one trustworthy to sit down to the table. Why bother if you won’t stand by what you agreed.
Ephraim, the last agreement went to a vote to the students. That process took a week, not hours, and it was rejected by a substantial margin. http://montreal.mediacoop.ca/story/why-i-voted-against-qu%C3%A9bec-government-offer-and-continue-strike/10853 explains why many voted against it.
If an agreement is ever signed, it’s going to be very interesting to watch these student “leaders” attempt to disband their mob. As has been said many times, this isn’t about the tuition increase anymore. By next week it may be about getting China out of Tibet or the tar sands or aboriginal rights.
The members of both unions started to denounce the agreement the morning after having signed it, before it even went to a vote. They said it was because there were changes that were made that they hadn’t agreed to, even though they signed it. Likely… there were other reasons. But the government did negotiate in good faith, signed in good faith and was willing to live with the agreement. The fact that they started talking about the agreement in negative the next morning does not indicate good faith. You keep on negotiating until you have something you can live with… you don’t sign and put up to ratification.
The point being, no matter what is put on the table now or discussed now isn’t viewed by the government as being in good faith. (The government’s best bet at this moment is open negotiations, with the press watching, so they can show good faith and the press can report on progress, openly.)
The other problem is that this is no longer about the students, because no one cares about them. They lost. The whole discussion now is on the right to demonstrate. You can’t negotiate it. It’s the job of the supreme court and it will take a LONG time to get there… and there is no point for a law that expires in a year.
@Ephraim
That’s your point of view. My impression is that they berated these people for like 20 hours until they agreed to anything, then singled out one student and made him sign. If you just look at the agreement itself, it’s pretty one-sided. I don’t know how it even got to the point of being signed by one student; but I doubt good faith had anything to do with it.
Not my personal opinion at all. Just because someone points out something from someone else’s perspective, doesn’t make it their personal opinion. And rest assured, this isn’t mine.
I’m just presenting how it appears to the government. From their standpoint, when the heads of the student unions starting backing away it appeared to them that there was no one to talk to.
Frankly, as with all negotiations, the students need to come up with a win-win situation, which they can’t. Politically they don’t have enough will to get what they want. The population is overburdened with taxes and they just don’t want to hear that the students don’t want to pay their part. The polls aren’t in favour of what they want. The polls don’t like law 78 either. But just because people don’t want law 78, doesn’t mean they want to give in to the students either.
Asking to control the schools isn’t a good idea, Concordia’s student union taught us that one. Asking to not invest in research isn’t a good idea, that is how Universities go down the drain. And asking to pay nothing isn’t a good idea, because people don’t take the cost of education seriously.
How many students would be willing to pay the FULL ECONOMIC COST of a course if they failed it? How many students would be willing to pay FULL ECONOMIC COST if they didn’t finish their program (at full time) in the allotted period (ie 3 years for a 3 year program).
For example, most CEGEP programs are normally 2 years, what percentage are finishing in 2 years? Who’s paying for the third year? So, should the government be paying for it, or should the students? Other questions exist, should they have to refund the subsidy be repaid if they leave the province? How do you make the rich pay and the poor not. There are a lot of questions and free education is NOT a good answer. I don’t have any answers except that it’s just not worth $1778 to lose an eye. It’s not worth $1778 to end up in jail for up to 5 years and likely be unable to travel. And frankly it’s not worth $1778 to lose a year of your retirement fund. That’s the reality of this strike.
Come with a real solution that doesn’t cost the taxpayers of this province money and won’t ruin the universities. To get the taxpayers on board you need to understand that the population doesn’t want to pay more tax.
And as far as adults wearing the carre rouge, I want to see them coughing up bursary money instead of putting on 5c worth of material on their lapel. (Put your money where your mouth is.)
Quebec isn’t “over-burdened” by taxes. And even free tuition would cost only like ~1% extra in taxes. I think you should put your money where your mouth is – how about paying back for that cheap tuition that you received (for example via taxes today)? I think it’s especially those people who studied within the last 30 years in Quebec who are not putting their money where their mouth is – benefiting from cheap tuition, but now beating that dead horse that this hike matters from a budget point of view. Just because they are afraid of the taxes going up a notch, knowing that Quebec won’t be able to save money where waste is actually happening.
Why not look at it from the students point of view, rather than the government (the government actually has no business having a point of view)? They have elected representatives who’ve shown nothing but contempt for large sections of the population; and when they stand up to be heard; they are being beaten down by police and special legislation.
Two things: I’ve taught in university. Most students are working part-time or even full-time. I cannot assign the amount or complexity of material that I had to read as a student because students now don’t have the time to read it or digest it. Higher fees mean more distracted and stressed students. It really, really makes a difference to the of the university or CEGEP. Most professors will echo this opinion.
Second: I get that taxpayers are not a bottomless purse but the level of money squandering that goes on in universities is huge. Admin jobs are well-paid and continually expanding while permanent (even multi-year contract) professor positions are an afterthought at best. It is even worse with building expansion projects – particularly here in Montreal where it is an invitation to mismanagement. (Recall my pet hate: the Ilot Voyageur fiasco at $500 million and counting!).
Universities do not need more and fancier buildings; they need empty rooms basically anywhere. Making internationally competitive universities has nothing to do with the buildings (except in science and the Harper government is wrecking most Cdn research facilities as we speak). There is enough money right now; it is being siphoned away by administrators who couldn’t care less about the central function of the universities: teaching.
@ant6n – “Quebec isn’t “over-burdened” by taxes”
Ahem, I beg to differ. If you have a job I suggest you have a look at your last check stub. What percentage of your earnings would need to be taken away from you for you to consider yourself “overburdened” by taxes? Personally, handing over half of my check before paying 15% sales tax is pretty close to my limit.
So we’re just kind of stuck with the fact that taxpayers don’t want to pay for education? $1625 x 200,000 students = $325,000,000 the government saves, if we use simple, shoddy math. That’s a third of a billion per year, lets say.
So the population is OK with squeezing a third of a billion out of the 18-24s of their society. Plus all of that interest being fed to those who loaned them the money.
Fine. Because they’re clearly too lazy and stupid to question what goes on around them.
I have lost all sympathy for anyone not with the strike. The baby boomers, set for retirement, can’t do anything more to mess up their ability to retire in peace and financial security. They’ve landed their sweet lives right where they want them, and are too stupid to realize that they can’t mess it up for themselves. Their economic decisions are only rear their ugly faces when the youth grow up and are stuck with it.
Did they get mad when the train line to Mascouche jumped from $300million to $715million?
Did they get mad when they decided to throw $400million into a stadium with no team?
Did they get mad when the metro cars jumped in price from $1.2billion to $3billion?
Did they get mad when their government ignored the infrastructure and allowed it to crumble? When people died?
And then did they get mad when the cost to rebuild the Turcot interchange jumped from $1.5billion to $3.3billion?
And are they going to get mad when the Charbonneau commission exposes the crooked deals and billions lost over the last decade to collusion and Mafia deals? It got to the point where we *needed* a commission to show just how much taxpayer money is being throw into corrupt pockets.
More simple math. $415million + $400million + $1.8billion + $1.8billion = close to $4.5billion.
There. I just found about 15 years worth of a $1625 hike we wouldn’t *need*. And that’s only from the four government wastes I bothered to count. Nevermind the superhospitals, the other construction projects, and the other thousand incidences of the government throwing away money.
Students are young. Most of them only got the chance to vote less than 4 years ago. A bunch still can’t vote. Save for children, they are the ONLY slice of the population that has not asked for a debt crisis. They had NOTHING to do with it. And now they are inheriting it. And what the government (and, apparently, the province) is saying is asking them to pay “THEIR FAIR SHARE.” Their fair share of what?
Nobody took notice that the biggest suggestion the student groups has made is that they restructure taxes to pull more money from the higher brackets? They are university students. They know that their degrees will likely land them higher paying jobs. This is not a situation where the students don’t want to contribute to society. They’re practically saying that they WANT to be contributing to society. They’re willing to thrust themselves into those tax brackets. They know where tax dollars come from, and they don’t mind putting themselves there.
If taxpayers in Quebec think that it’s OK to punish the only fiscally innocent section of society, then I invite the youth to have a revolution.
We get people saying that youth are spoiled with their iPhones and weekend beer. Well, that’s what the older generation has established for the young people. The baby boomers shaped the world we live in, and now that they see what it has borne, they think that the youth are the entitled ones.
Well, according to the current provincial debt, they’ve spoiled themselves with $250 billion.
So yes, these students are entitled. They’re entitled to the same rich and fantastic lives the older generation have enjoyed, and to a peaceful retirement.
So to the people who are offended by their 15% sales tax and 50% income tax rates, I can only ask… why didn’t you take to the streets? Why aren’t you in the streets tonight?
Because instead of shaping the society you wanted, you let it go. And the students are taking it back.
@ant6n Very early on in this protest I submitted a comment where I supported the idea of paying back the difference on the cheap tuition I paid at Concordia from 1999-2004. My reasoning was that as someone who benefited from artificially low tuition I had a responsibility to pay my fair share if I wanted today’s students to pay more. While my offer still stands I doubt that even if we were to get all Quebec alumni to agree to the same terms, that the students would not accept an increase. This passion play that they are running, and natural rush of leading a “movement/uprising”, not to mention the media coverage it’s garnering, is clearly addictive.
@Bill Binns – That’s only half the trouble. If you ever work as a business person or freelancer and fall behind on your taxes (for example, because you suddenly lost a major client and needed all your income to pay rent), you’ll find out that RQ’s attitude towards those who are behind but honestly trying to catch up on paying their “fair share” is far less friendly than the SPVM’s attitude toward the protesters. That was a personal experience. I’ve also spoken to a friend of mine who runs a small store in MTL and who was at one point aggressively audited. He said that many times during that long ordeal he felt like simply throwing in the towel, closing shop and going on the dole – it’s simpler, easier, you have more free time, and instead of being shaken down by RQ you can join those who are demanding more from their government. Perhaps that’s the right attitude to take in Quebec (while there’s still funds to be redistributed).
RQ… you mean the government body that says that they are against the underground economy, but doesn’t actually have a department that deals with it? The office that makes more money on fines of the normal taxpayer but doesn’t seem all that interested in actually doing something about the underground economy (AirBnB as one example, no GST, QST, Tourism Tax, never mind asking if they are paying both income taxes and city property tax).
@Philip
Everything you’ve suggested HAS generated outrage and frustration – just not demonstrations in the street. Probably because parents with kids, and those who live in the suburbs, can’t take the time to come back downtown in the evening to go protest!
As for restructuring income taxes — if you hike taxes too high, rich people just… leave. Officially setting up a principal residence in another province (or state) is very simple if you have the cash.
And if it’s too hard, a rich person takes their skills and investments and goes elsewhere, like 75% of people who immigrate to Quebec under investor-class rules.
Then where does that leave us?
In case you don’t know, tax is determined by where you reside on the 31st of December. It’s easy to switch provinces (to Alberta for example) and get all your Quebec taxes back and pay Alberta’s low taxes instead. The middle class pays the highest part of the burden. There are no “rich” to run to. It’s a fallacy. All taxes eventually come back to the tax payer. There are only two ways to fix this, drive down the cost of services and ensure that everyone pays their fair share.
Here’s the problem… Peladeau’s children pay the same tuition rate. Is it fair? That’s the point of bursaries, scholarships, etc. Instead of fighting the tuition hike, they should fight for more bursaries for those that need it. That’s why the offer from the government was a good starting point, they came up with more money for those in need. But that is where they have room to negotiate, increase the bursaries based on need, index them, make them cover tuition for those most vulnerable.
“Peladeau’s children pay the same tuition rate. Is it fair?”
Yes, as long as he contributes more taxes through a progressive tax system. What’s the big deal that students ask that they pay their tuition later, once they enter the work place, via taxes, rather than going into debt up front? This is how it’s been done the last thirty years, so why move away from that now? I think it’s unfair from a generational point of view that older generations pay their tuition later via taxes (as they do now), but students today are asked to pay a higher share of the education, but then they are also asked to pay the same share of taxes, effectively subsidizing older generations.
Something led me to read this Salon.com piece about the U.S. Republican party’s rejection of a longstanding process of collecting data on the populace, a change which reflects so closely the Harper government’s scrapping of the long census form (and its disposal of other forms of data collection) that I recommend we all read it.
The final two sentences of the article especially apply:
Progress is built on the accumulation of knowledge, and ideological rigidity shouldn’t be able to compete against the truth that derives from a better understanding of our universe. And yet that’s where we are today — watching as one of the two major political parties in our country becomes not just more and more distrustful of science, but also opposed to the very notion of information-gathering — and governs accordingly.
Who needs information when you’ve got religion? Who needs debate when you’ve got rhetoric? Who needs poor people when you’ve got rich people?
Who needs analysis when you have convictions?
Because we all know that every single one of the 100,000 + protesters in the street could give a detailed analysis of the current situation with regard to Bill 78 and tuition hikes. I wouldn’t be surprised if each and every one of them could provide statistics on public spending on universities as well as all of the relevant jurisprudence as it relates to constitutional law and Bill 78.
@mdblog
The students are on average clearly more informed than the green squares, the old people, anglophones and the ROC. If you read stuff on the internet against the hikes, they are generally much better with the numbers than the polemics saying that Quebec is Canada’s Greece and the spoiled, self-entitled Iphone-wielding brats need to shut up and pay up (i.e. the Gazette, Globe’n'Mail, CBC, CTV…).
@ant6n
You think they (the students) are more informed because they agree with your point of view. Don’t you see that?
Love the sleight against Anglos. I see your true colours. Racist.
Last week I was a “fabulous fonctionnaire” (you used that against me because I compiled factual information that didn’t agree with your point of view, ironically), today I’m a “Racist”. Who’s showing “true colors”?
mdblog, you can’t behave like that on this blog. ant6n has never said anything remotely racist here and I won’t have it.
@Kate
Fair enough. I will censor myself, ok? I wouldn’t want to be banished.
@ant6n
We simply don’t agree and I can live with that. Apologies for the name calling. I will remain more civilized in future discourse.
People demonstrated in Paris and New York on Tuesday in support of the student strike and popular movement against Bill 78. Those wringing their hands over Montreal’s besmirched image might remember that, to many people, it’s not a detraction when a city stands on its principles. So far, tourism numbers haven’t been affected.
Not surprisingly, police are feeling tired.
TVA interviews the Anarchopanda.
A purely peaceful neighbourhood protest has been the 8 p.m. rough music created by banging on pots and pans, a form of protest that began in South America but is taking hold here.
I do love the pots & pans but there is a growing backlash from parents of young children… 8pm is bedtime for many children. It wouldn’t be a big deal except that it’s residential neighbourhoods – I can imagine a few parents of infants being particularly incensed. :D It does seem to go on quite late, I’m glad I don’t have a ground floor apartment or my kids would be a mess.
I know. I think it makes more sense at least to come out to major intersections and do it, rather than making a racket at home.
Why don’t they go protest in Laval for a couple of days. That would be a good change. There’s metro stations in Laval and there’s plenty of students from there as well. Start at Montmorency station, walk up to Carrefour Laval and then back to the station by a different route.
It looks like the students are out of imagination in terms of what to do to be heard. Downtown has heard them well so they should try elsewhere….just for a while.
I sense the government will bend over soon if for no other reason than to prevent screwing up Gran Prix week.
Yep. June 8 weekend is both the Grand prix weekend and the start of the Francofolies.
«(…)to many people, it’s not a detraction when a city stands on its principles.(…)» True. And in any case, those manifs are a great way to visit our city. They even go in Westmount!
I suppose nothing will make these protesters happier than to ruin the summer tourist season. Who needs those tourist dollars when we have the government to support us!
A 4m2 sinkhole has opened on Sherbrooke Street near McGill, and the street is closed.
Obviously an attempt by the secret conspiracy alliance between La Presse and the Liberal party to engulf protesting students as they walk down Sherbrooke St. I knew it!
I kind of liked the CBC’s headline “after student protest” – I suppose they mean “wow, what if that had happened when people were walking over it” but it does sound a bit implied cause/effect.
The obvious interpretation is that since a sinkhole is an act of God and since no students were hurt but the city is disrupted, God is a supporter of the protests. :D
I blame last September’s water main break at the top of the hill.
http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110908/mtl_flood_110908?hub=MontrealHome
Blame His Lordship the Emperor Tremblay and a hundred years of winter/spring melts.
How crazy would have it been if that hole had opened up a few hours earlier and swallowed 50-60 protesters? We would have been hearing stories about Tremblay’s evil mafia hit squad until doomsday.
I wonder if your faith and trust in the Emperor is as solid as that wall of bricks that fell on a passerby last week.
There was also a giant dip in the street, filled with water, as we (the protest) walked by, it was already blocked off with those traffic cones.
@Ian
It was also wierd that it rained all day. Except at 2pm it stopped, and at 5pm it restarted. The sun must like the protesters too ;-)
mdblog 20:56 on 2012/05/23 Permalink
I hope these people are pleased with themselves. The right to assemble is important, but not as important as the law and order that underpins that right. Disrespect that and mark my words, you will not be happy with the society you end up with.
Jack 21:17 on 2012/05/23 Permalink
mdblog I am not buying, especially when that law and order only applies to the least amongst us.If you honestly believe that the rule of law is impartial and shows no benefit to the wealthy and privileged we don’t live on the same planet.I am happy to live in Villeray and see my neighbors engaged with each other to denounce a foolish law that Montreal policeman wont enforce.Plus it was kinda fun making noise.
Jonathan 21:46 on 2012/05/23 Permalink
Agreed. It was really moving to see everyone from the neighbourhood out and taking a stand against an immoral law.
AJ 23:21 on 2012/05/23 Permalink
Jonathan, you and Carrie are my almost-neighbours! Yeah, it’s a joyful noise.
Spock 06:31 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
Thank God things are civilised where I live.
JaneyB 08:17 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
Saw some casserole-ians marching south down Cote-Ste-Catherine at Saint-Joseph last night around 11.30pm. A small group but good for them! This is the sound of political participation. Democracy is messy, noisy, disorganized sometimes but it’s aliiiive!
Bill Binns 08:20 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
@Spock – Thankfully quiet on my street as well. Actual quote from a 60 something year old woman in my laundry room yesterday: “They should round them all up and make them join the army if they don’t want to go to school”. Don’t think I will have to endure a lot of pot-banging in my building.
qatzelok 08:21 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
I heard some casserolians near my karaoke bar last night. Coincidentally, I sang this song right after they passed by: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNEn4BF7xe4
Jack 09:00 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
Spock civilized meaning Westmount,Outremont,Hampstead or TMR? I wonder if the vitriol surrounding this debate is about how frightened our 1% are.You can certainly feel it in the media they own and in the opinion construct that follows.I wonder what the Desmarais, Peladeaus and Molson families talk about at dinner.
paul 10:07 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
@Jack, I don’t think the 1% applies in this case…considering it is the minority involved in these protests.
Jack 10:38 on 2012/05/24 Permalink
@paul the minority I was speaking about can not put 200,000 people on the streets of Montreal.They can however implement a draconian law with huge charter implications( careful what you Tweet!).They can also get two armed to the teeth police forces to implement that “law”. However more importantly your minority can frame the debate and its references by its ownership of our media.Anecdote ,talking to a friend at the CBC where the Harper chill is real, the thing that they can not get over is the pull of CUTV and media like it, that scares them.