PQ leader pushes for constitutional crisis
PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon is determined not to swear the standard oath to the King and seems willing to create a constitutional crisis to make a point.
-
Kate
Reply
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Ephraim on Airbnb: more fallout from the fire
- Ephraim on Airbnb: more fallout from the fire
- Jonathan on Airbnb: more fallout from the fire
- Blork on Montreal tops Canada for illegal Airbnbs
- Meezly on Montreal tops Canada for illegal Airbnbs
- Nicholas on Montreal tops Canada for illegal Airbnbs
- Michael on Montreal tops Canada for illegal Airbnbs
☠️
INCIDENT TOTE BOARDS 2023
Island homicides
6
Pedestrians killed
0
Cyclists killed*
1
*Includes skateboarders
Pages
Other levels of gov’t
Sideblog projects
Enviro Montreal is a Twitter feed that follows environment news.
Archives
Pages rescued from montreal.com
Meta
carswell 16:07 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
If you become a Canadian citizen, you have to swear allegiance to the king/queen and their heirs. Creepy, I agree, but until we become a republic, which Quebec won’t let us do, it’s the law and reality. Suck it up, snowflake! If you don’t want to do it, you shouldn’t have run for office.
Kevin 16:10 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
Pretty bold for a guy who only has a seat because an opponent stole leaflets.
Ephraim 16:14 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
PUBLICITY STUNT. First, he has already sworn it, since he had to do it for each time he has served in the national assembly. So the only reason he is doing this is for the publicity, before he’s shown the door as the worst leader of the PQ ever, since they had their worst showing. Even the guy who’s been sentenced to two years less a day for sexual assault… did better than him. Or does he just not want anyone to notice how bad he did in this election? Even the first year the PQ ran they managed 7 seats!
Tim S. 16:16 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
He has a powerful case to make for electoral reform, which could benefit his party, the province and maybe even his ultimate goal in the long run, but this is how he chooses to spend his political capital. OK.
carswell 16:49 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
When has PSPP served in the National Assembly, Ephraim?
Chris 18:29 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
>So the only reason he is doing this is for the publicity
I don’t think that follows. Sure, publicity may be part of it, but it seems entirely plausible that a separatist party leader would also be a republican, not a monarchist, and is acting out of honest convictions.
And with Elisabeth now gone, it is reasonable to have the republic discussion.
Kate 18:39 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
PSPP never held a National Assembly seat before this month’s election, so carswell is right – he’s never been called on before to take that oath. And because he was born a Canadian (tee hee) he’s never had to become a citizen either.
> And with Elisabeth now gone, it is reasonable to have the republic discussion.
It should not have mattered to PSPP who was occupying the throne, if he believes so strongly in republicanism. I doubt he had any sentimental attachment to Queen Elizabeth.
Tim S. has a point. PSPP should be prioritizing other matters.
I also want to observe that PSPP knows damn well that the oath is not a question of the monarch as a person, but of taking seriously the fact that one respects the Crown in the sense that it’s the focal point of our legal system. But he knows his mulish position plays well to the gallery.
Kevin 19:26 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
The more I think about it the more insulted I am that PSPP is deliberately playing on the ignorance of citizens.
The monarch is legally recognized as being a living symbol of all citizens, and PSPP knows he is being asked to swear an oath of allegiance, not of fealty.
The oaths (because MNAs swear to the Sovereign and to the people of Quebec too) have been sworn by generations of separatists who saw no need to change it–something that has been debated in the NatAss and yet was never changed.
H. John 21:45 on 2022-10-11 Permalink
He, like his party, is irrelevant; and yet Quebec pundits are and will be talking about him. He got what he wanted.
Clearly Quebecers are still oppressed by Britain and the ROC.
He will, of course, take the oath – possibly adding the theatre others have used of keeping his fingers crossed while he does it, or adding an extra phrase at the end (Landry supposedly added “for the duration of the present constitutional order, which will hopefully change one day in a democratic fashion.”).
Without question, it will be done behind closed doors, and not in public (as the QS members already do).
He also has the option of asking Trudeau to call a Constitutional Conference to change the Canadian Constitution. The oath and who is required to take it are part of the original 1867 BNA Act, now the Canadian Constitution. But it doesn’t seem like he has a lot of time for that one.
Ephraim 06:22 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
Wow… a party elected a leader who has never been in the National Assembly? Okay, I stand corrected. That’s really more of a sign of the decline of the PQ than anything else.
Still think it’s a publicity stunt. Because how else is he going to get in the news when the party is failing and almost dead. How many people have sworn in to the National Assembly against their own beliefs. And in one case, Ezekiel Hart, been denied their seat because of the oath. (He offered to swear in as required, but they wouldn’t allow him, because he was Jewish and couldn’t swear as a “true Christian”)
If he won’t swear, then don’t let him take the seat. Don’t hold a bi-election either. Leave it in limbo. It’s not like the PQ is really relevant. He represents his riding, as an outsider… and MNA without a voice. And then let’s talk about changing the oath, if the CAQ has time for it.
To be honest, the oath can be easily changed. We don’t really need the monarchy in there. But what we do need in there is a clause against discrimination related to the constituents…. so regardless of race, colour, language, sex that you will represent your constituents… which might be even harder for an MNA to swear… and a clause on minimum punishment for violation of oath, perjury or bribery while in office that includes loss of pension and the inability to serve in public office in the future. I mean, if we are going to reform it, let’s make it clear that you are not to enrich yourself while serving
Chris 08:57 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
>I doubt he had any sentimental attachment to Queen Elizabeth.
Agreed, but that was not my point. Many others had sentimental attachment to her, so delaying a republicanism discussion until after her death is a concession and strategy.
>If he won’t swear, then don’t let him take the seat. Don’t hold a bi-election either.
Wow, so the monarchy is more important than democracy? You would prefer to deny his constituency any representation?!
You guys know the *majority* of Canadians don’t want the monarchy, right? More so in Quebec of course. Why do you have your knickers in such a knot that some of our elected officials reflect this popular public opinion?!
Kate 10:11 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
You’re missing the point, Chris. The Crown is a fundamental entity in our legal and political system. It is not undemocratic. The oath just means you recognize and will honour the legal and political structure in place. The system IS democratic.
Most monarchies now are democratic. Nobody goes around saying Sweden or Japan or the Netherlands are autocracies because they have a monarch as the formal head of state. Only Saudi Arabia would qualify now, I think. Maybe a few smaller places like Lesotho, Bhutan and Brunei.
Chris 10:44 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
>The Crown is a fundamental entity in our legal and political system. It is not undemocratic.
You’re missing the point, Kate. I didn’t say the crown was undemocratic. I’m saying* Ephraim’s suggestion of “Don’t let him take the seat. Don’t hold a bi-election either.” is undemocratic. Especially the second sentence. He’s advocating a seat be left *vacant*, denying democratic representation to a riding. Because why? Because apparently swearing to the crown is more important than having representation in the AssNat.
in fact I wasn’t even saying it. I was asking Ephraim to clarify if that’s what he’s really saying.
Chris 10:47 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
Meh, your WordPress ate my leading asterisk. The last paragraph is supposed to be a footnote to “I’m saying”.
Ephraim 11:50 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
No, Chris, that’s not what I said. I said that his refusal should mean that he can’t take his seat in the National Assembly. I didn’t say that he couldn’t serve his constituents. They are two entirely different things. You don’t need to actually sit in the NA to do the job, especially when you have only 3 seats. It’s not like your vote is going to change anything, at all. I’m saying the job is to be done by him, but until he swears as required, he not be allowed to actually sit and vote in the National Assembly. But do the job…. most of it never gets to the floor of the National Assembly anyways… that’s the “show”.
What I find appalling is that he doesn’t realize that his job in the National Assembly isn’t about HIM, personally. The people of his riding hired a man who’s unwilling to do what he needs to do to represent them, it is appalling. He’s not Paul St-Chose Plamondon (as Jean-René Dufort referred to him on Infoman) in the National Assembly, he is the representative of the riding of Camille-Laurin, regardless of his own personal qualms… he needs to represent the constituents. So, either put your personal qualms in a box and do the job you were elected to do, or get out of the way so that the constituents can have proper representation.
He is free at any time to step down (and I’m willing to bet that he will. When? Well, I don’t expect it will be too long before the PQ decides to have another leadership run… I mean, you can’t have the worst showing in the history of the party and expect that you will be asked to run the party into the next election.) And when you step down, there will be a bi-election. But I really think that we should reform the oath. The monarchy isn’t really important… but swearing to do the job and represent all constituents, regardless of age, race, sex, colour and even political standing should be part of the oath. But further, I think the oath should lay out consequences for the misdeeds of politicians, especially corruption, that clearly requires them to forgo their pensions and further public service for violating the public trust.
And to be honest, I find this is all a symptom of the grand political problem in Quebec where politicians forget that they are here to the best for the province as a whole, rather than a riding or a voting block. The map of the Montreal metro is a testament to this nonsense.. stations seem to appear not based on any scientific or economic reasons… they are based on political reasons… a really horrible way to do things. (Which is why I’m a rationalist, rather than being liberal or conservative. And note that’s a small l and small c, not political parties)
Ephraim 11:53 on 2022-10-12 Permalink
BTW, what is entirely commendable about Ezekiel Hart was that he was, in fact, willing to forego his own personal stand as a Jew in order to sit and represent the people of Three Rivers / Trois Rivieres and swear a Christian oath to Jesus, even if he didn’t personally believe in it, so he could represent those who elected him…. exactly everything that Paul St-Chose Plamondon isn’t willing to do.
Chris 09:19 on 2022-10-13 Permalink
Ephraim, thanks for clarifying your views.
Well, we agree anyway that the oath should be reformed.
And you know how you get things reformed? You bring attention to them. You protest again them. You threaten a boycott. i.e. what the PQ is doing here.
Ephraim 10:30 on 2022-10-13 Permalink
Yes, but he’s doing a disservice to those who elected him… also to the PQ in general. He’s educated here at McGill and at Oxford. I wonder what he’s mates from Oxford think of this stunt. There is NOTHING commendable in this stand, he’s doing it for himself and for the trolls on the Internet.
Orr 13:31 on 2022-10-13 Permalink
I understand PSPP’s hockey jersey has number 1759 on it.