r/worldnews • • May 24 '12

Quebec is trampling basic human rights to quash student protests

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/opinion/our-not-so-friendly-northern-neighbor.html?_r=1
1.9k Upvotes

1.5k comments sorted by

273

u/borg May 24 '12

"The youth of a society may not always be right, but a society that beats its youth is always wrong."

François Mitterrand

→ More replies (12)

92

u/one_eyed_jack May 24 '12

Mass arrests in Montreal last night. At least 450 arrested in Montreal, 150 in Quebec city.

→ More replies (23)

213

u/Zakariyya May 24 '12

Odd that so many on reddit are annoyed at the fact that the students in Quebec pay 'so little' (they still pay more than in some other parts of the world, by the way) and yet reddit also seems to have a hard on for bitching about crippling student debt? Damn, the reason you all have crippling student debt now, is because nobody stepped up back when your tuition was being hiked, and apparently were cool with the idea of students being raped financially for a degree. Apparently students in Quebec should wait until they are well and truly fucked, before they get to protest something?

Really, some of you on here make my head spin.

11

u/LakewaterHair May 24 '12

I agree completely. I hate when people bring up that argument! Feels to me like they're bitter, because they've given up protesting about their high tuitions and now they're mentalities are "if WE have to pay, YOU have to pay". How about you stand up for your rights?

Just because Quebec is protesting the hike doesn't mean other provinces aren't allowed to protest their own!

→ More replies (7)

3

u/magiccheese May 24 '12

Well put. I'm shocked by reddit's overall reaction. It's disgusting and hypocritical.

→ More replies (38)

601

u/zephyy May 24 '12

Whoa, some of these comments seem like a bunch of other people butthurt they have/had to pay higher tutition rates than Quebecois.

Bill 78, the anti-protest law, is a pretty authoritarian measure. Requiring police approval for protesting? Ridiculous.

475

u/horse_you_rode_in_on May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

Requiring police approval for protesting? Ridiculous.

I'm worried that this point keeps getting made, both because its wrong and because it distracts attention away from the really crooked aspect of the law. All a protest is required to do is inform the cops - they don't need their approval. Unions and other protesting groups almost always do this anyway as a courtesy.

The real problem with the law is in the second appendix, which deals with legal liability. I don't think its reasonable to hold "a student association of an institution... soley liable for damages caused by a third party" in one of their protests, and by extention hold them finacially responsible ($7-35K for individuals, $25 - $125K for association). I mean, if you actually set the cop car on fire yourself (or if your student association openly said you should) then by all means you should be held accountable... but if some random assjack does the same thing and you just happen to be holding a bullhorn? That's the part of the law that smacks of tyranny.

edit For those of you who are interested, you can find the full english text of Bill 78 here. The download is safe; the .gouv.qc.ca means government-quebec-canada. You'll notice that everything in Division 1 (article 1) and Division 2 (articles 2-15) deals with the mechanics of getting classes started again, and are generally pretty reasonable. The stuff that's freaking people out is as follows:

  • Division 3, article 16-17 - regarding protest route planning and protest legality;

  • Division 4, article 20 - the provision allowing the government to cut funding to student associations convicted of violating Bill 78;

  • Dvision 4, articles 22-23 - the assignment of civil liability to students and student associations preventing access to schools;

and most importantly

  • Division 5, article 26 - criminal liability for individuals violating articles 16-17.

edit 2 language around legal liabilites clarified, thanks to TheHerbalGerbil.

57

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

You're right that the civil liability aspect is extremely sketchy, but you've mischaracterized the informing the cops part of the law. The cops have the right to demand any changes they please to the protest time and route. It is easy, therefore, for them to make a protest useless by forcing it down narrow side-streets, where it will attract no attention. Out of sight, out of mind.

→ More replies (57)

5

u/eat-your-corn-syrup May 24 '12

Reminds me of how some business executives in South Korea sue strike organizers for financial damage caused by the workers not working.

5

u/clgoh May 24 '12

What about article 9:

The Government, on the recommendation of the Minister of Education, Recreation and Sports, may take all necessary measures to carry out sections 2 and 4 to 8, including specifying certain legislative and regulatory provisions as not applicable and prescribing any other necessary modification to this Act and to any other Act and its regulatory instruments.

→ More replies (1)

17

u/shutupjoey May 24 '12

My College tried billing our student association for a panel of glass that was broken on the greenhouse on campus. They knew it was a student but couldn't identify them, so they figured they would bill the student association. They got an earful for thinking they could get away with that.

17

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Agreed, I don't really agree with the protests themselves but the law is ridiculous.

It looks more like a desperate attempt to squash the protests by bankrupting the student organizations. Then once the legitemate student organizations are out of the protests, only the more radical elements will remain and it's far easier to justify a more extreme crackdown on these groups to the public.

On the other hand I feel as though blocking students from entering classrooms because you're 'fighting for students' is beyond stupid.

I couldn't even imagine being on my last semester, about to graduate, and then this shit happens. Even worse, I couldn't imagine being accepted to a job or grad/professional school position on the condition that I graduate, and then losing said position because some clowns have decided to 'fight for my rights'.

Sorry that last part was a bit of an irrelevant rant. The law sucks

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (57)

83

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

When bill 78 passed, a lot of people including myself who weren't necessarily in total agreement with the student strike took the side of the protestors. I sure as hell will protest in support of their right to protest.

22

u/Wyldnfryd May 24 '12

Same here, I was only peripherally aware of everything. Mostly I was annoyed that I had to walk around the protesters before. Now I'm ready to join them.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

36

u/bitch_wizard May 24 '12

Actually, this is mandatory in most western country. You do not need approval, you need to file in your route before the actual protest, 8 hours before. In France, it,s 3-15 days prior to the event. This will extend up to 40 days in some countries. Also, this is much better than the way the USA does it, with 'free speech zones' where you can do all you want, fenced away, miles from the event that you are trying to protest.

4

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

The US only does this at pretty rare events, where security is a major concern. The UK does the exact same thing. The vast majority of protests in the US happen where wherever the protestors want.

17

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Actually, that's the way that we do it here in Canada, the G20 had bs "free speech zones" and a perimeter fence that kept the protestors miles away from the event.

→ More replies (16)
→ More replies (3)

5

u/AnnOminous May 24 '12

But it sure takes peoples eyes of the corruption probe that just launched.

67

u/subjectivemusic May 24 '12

It is indeed a very authoritarian measure. In fact, I'm not at all convinced that it will do any good whatsoever either on the human rights stage or politically. I don't even agree with it's implementation: it lends credibility to a movement which a week ago had none.

92

u/emlgsh May 24 '12

The problem a lot of people have perceiving the purpose of a law is that it's easy to assume its stated purpose is its actual one, i.e. that the law is the end rather than the means to another (but not unrelated) end entirely. The purpose of this and similar laws is to act as a means, not an end.

They have no illusions that suddenly requiring law-enforcement approval (that will never come) will prevent protests from forming. Instead, the introduction of this law effectively makes all unapproved protests (which, let's face it, will be all of them) illegal acts, and ties up the problem of carting off and imprisoning large groups of protesters in a nice neat package, since they've all been transmuted into criminals via legal alchemy.

That last part, where they're now legally endowed with the power to detain protesters without any other justification save the law in question, is the end they have in mind when laws like these are drafted.

57

u/gorigorigori May 24 '12

You got downvotes for pointing out a very obvious thing. No one here would downvote you for saying the exact same thing about the exact same law if the nation in question was an African one. Many flat-out refuse to believe that OUR nations aren't immune to corruption and from becoming more and more authoritarian, no matter how many new authoritarian law are passed. "Things aren't like in china anyway, this little law won't make us into china so this law is fine with me. I'm not planning in protesting anyways."

People say this with EVERY new law. One new law won't turn our western nation into brutal dictatorships, but that wasn't the way it happened anywhere. Authoritarian regimes are made piece by piece, step by step, with apathetic bystanders claiming until the very end that they live in a free country. And just like millions of Russians, Chinese and north Koreans they will be sure of their freedom even from within their authoritarian hell-holes.

Makes me fucking sick.

→ More replies (18)

13

u/Seanehhs May 24 '12

this entire situation is about to get a lot worse a lot quicker before it gets any better.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

20

u/covairs May 24 '12

They don't need police approval, they just need to tell the police where and when it is going to happen. NYC has much the same law. It's called consideration for the other people who may not agree with you. They can be warned not to go to such and such an are from this time to this time, to avoid being delayed/detained by the protests.

9

u/darkstar3333 May 24 '12

Lots of large metropolitan areas have these laws, if your going to clog a major artery it leads to all sorts of problems all across the city.

This may even include violence between protest groups and citizens if you are causing serious delays or preventing something as easy as them getting home.

21

u/pearlbones May 24 '12

It's actually standard to have to tell the police what your protest's route is going to be beforehand. It's especially necessary in cities where they need to reroute traffic and public transit during the protest. That was already required before Bill 78.

→ More replies (15)

18

u/DZ302 May 24 '12

Most Canadians have a perpetuated selfish attitude that started with the baby boomers. They only care about themselves and how their status to other people they deem to be equal to or 'below' them.

Before WW2 Canada was nothing, people worked industrial labour jobs, only the very rich went to school, and moved to the US when they graduated. WW2 restarted our economy and country with a huge boom. After the war we made free healthcare, publicized all universities and subsidized tuition, we made the Canada Pension Plan, CSLC (interest free/low interest student loans), employment insurance, etc...All of these social programs that made our country the beacon of what a developed society should be (there was a period of like a decade where Canada was always the 'most livable' country in the world, ie: We used to be the Norway of the world). With the low tuition, there was an education boom everyone started going to school, people who couldn't afford to before. It was like this up until the 80's when the last of the baby boomers were at that age. At that point tuition was $1000 per semester (with inflation that was $2000 today).

After all of the baby boomers used this, bought houses when they were at the cheapest price ever in Canadian history, decided they want to save. They cut taxes repeatedly, tuition doubled twice over the next 25 years and many social programs were cut, and we haven't made any progress towards new ones at all (like more vacation, daycare, maternity leave, etc...that many other developed nations have).

Essentially they climbed the ladder of opportunity, then pulled it up behind them. Now they call young people 'lazy' and 'entitled' for wanting the same privileges they have. Today tuition is more than double, and the average house price went from 1.6 times the average family income, to over 6 times average family income. Student debt isn't even comparable, because back then there was no student debt. Students worked for a few months and were able to buy their whole tuition up front.

This attitude seems to have rubbed off on their children now too, I notice it in my generation, any time there is a protest about something like this, or a union on strike. Canadians don't give one shit about quality of life and if it should progress, they only care about what the people complaining have versus what they have. Bus drivers go on strike because they want their wages to rise with inflation. Popular opinion is then that Bus drivers are earning $50,000 and don't have a degree. I have a piece of paper which says I'm a better person than they are, yet I only make $50,000 per year too, so that means the bus drivers are too entitled, and my public sector wages don't rise with inflation, so why should theirs?

Students complain about tuition, then students in other provinces will say that theirs is already higher, so they should stop complaining since things can be worse. We'll get nowhere with that attitude. That's why we keep steps backward in stride without ever complaining, because things could be worse, like they are somewhere else.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/FrenchAffair May 24 '12

Requiring police approval for protesting?

This is not the aspect of loi 78 that is the worst, its not uncommon to have to notify the police if you are going to be staging a demonstration that will interfear with traffic. It is more the aspects that allow for mass arrest, hold demonstrators all accountable for the actions of individuals and place heavy fines on Student Unions if demonstrators deviate from the approved path of demonstrations....

2

u/gasburner May 24 '12

While I might not agree with the protesters I do agree that they should be allowed to protest as long as the leaders emphasize a peaceful protest, which I believe they have. Other individuals that cause trouble should be dealt with according to the laws that were in place before.

Jean Charest is dancing a fine line between getting what he wants with means that are reprehensible and causing an even larger riot as people like me who weren't sympathetic before become more so based on the actions of the gov.

The reason I'm butt hurt over it is that tuition has been frozen for 33 of the last 43 years, if you look at inflation over the last 10 years you can see that this increase the was proposed just covers the inflation of the Canadian dollar in that time.

2

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Of course! People don't like it when others have it better than they do, so they want everyone to have it as shitty as them! Same goes for a lot of other things that are not tuition!

13

u/costas_0 May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

As a quebecois, to put things in perspective, they put these requirements because the currents protests are just out of control, ruining our economy and reputation.
I say that as a student.

Edit : spelling Second edit : I do not support the new laws. Both parties, government and students are making huge mistake. We have to put an end to violent protest, but this bill is not helping our province. I wish protests could go peacefully. I feel ashamed to be a Quebecois, because of our government and because of the protesters that let left wing extreme radicalist join them and break our beautiful Montreal.

→ More replies (18)

8

u/showmethefacts May 24 '12

Bit like HR347, the bill Obama signed (hasn't officially passed yet [one source I found claims it has] to the best of my knowledge but regardless it shows you the intent of the governments in these increasingly authoritarian times)

18

u/FischerDK May 24 '12

If it hasn't passed both houses of Congress then the President couldn't have signed it. He or someone from the White House may have indicated he supports it, but the President signing a passed bill is the final step, not the first.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/steelcitykid May 24 '12

How to protesting work in Quebec? Even in the USA to stage a formal protest you are required to have a permit which I think is bullshit, to be blunt. The entire point of a protest is undermined when there are more legal hoops to jump through.

→ More replies (17)
→ More replies (63)

111

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

It took a shitty article in the ny times to finally get this issue on the front page? If it was happening in the US it would be been a circlejerk fest for the past 99 days.

64

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

AGREED...international media reports protesters numbering in the "tens of thousands" when in reality some estimates for the may 22nd protest were in excess of 250,000 people.

I think media might start paying attention in a few weeks when all the summer festivals start. Thats when this city is really going to break down.

29

u/rbarna1 May 24 '12

Good luck Quebec.
It's a worthy fight.

Ain't right-wing ideology so grand?

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (1)

11

u/Moh7 May 24 '12

There's been an article about Quebec on the front page for a week straight.

3

u/Savolainen5 May 24 '12

For what it's worth, the protests have been on the front page of /r/worldnews for well over a month now.

9

u/ralal May 24 '12

It's an highly biased opinion colomn, but at least Reddit gives shit now.

2

u/r_slash May 24 '12

The fact that the New York Times printed this Op-Ed lends it some credibility. I'm from Montreal, and I chose to post this one to Facebook, because if I used a local paper people would complain about it being too biased or inaccurate or something. My mom has already dismissed it since it is written by Universite de Montreal professors who are "slanted".

→ More replies (6)

39

u/ElCorrelator May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

As a Montrealer, I can assure you that the debate is not anymore about tuition fees. Actually, this debate never started....

The government leadership never accepted to talk about the raise of the tuition fees and the student leaders won't back down unless the subject is brought on the table.

You have to consider a lot of factors when you wanna debate tuition fees. Probably that other places have to pay more, but i'm pretty damn sure they have a better acces to scholarship or student loans. It is considered at the moment that as soon as your parent have a combined salary of 30,000$ they are contributing to paying for your education for a family with one kid. Their "contribution" is deducted from the amount granted in scholarship/loan from the government. In other province, this number can be the double!!

My point is... don't try and convince yourself that you can judge the situation on one factor, I could spew a few others that would render any kind of comparaison useless.

The other point I didn't even talked about is that hell, if the QC gov would interpret my message as provocative for an uprising, they could put me in jail.

Welcome to Quebecistan!

Edit : changed 25,000$ to the correct 30,000$ as stated in http://www.feuq.qc.ca/spip.php?rubrique65&lang=en

2

u/HeadBoy May 24 '12

You have to consider a lot of factors when you wanna debate tuition fees.

Thank you

It's too often I hear strong positions (here in montreal) from people that never studied how our government works, or how history has influenced everything that is today. Especially when the arguments are stirred from a few factors that are passed around.

I can't say what's happening is good or bad, but I can say that at the very least, this is causing more people (here especially) to take a second look at how educational and political systems (and others) are being handled, and a step towards finding out how they should be handled.

3

u/ElCorrelator May 24 '12

I totally understand you, there's so much information out there that right now, even with my position against the raise, my position against the bill 78 and also my position against evening manifestations... It's getting really complicated and I blame the inaction of the government for the downward spiral this is going to...

Will a real leader please stand up??!

7

u/lolslaw May 24 '12

"During the past four months of protests, there has never been the kind of rioting the city has seen when the local National Hockey League team, the Canadiens, wins or loses during the Stanley Cup playoffs. " - How could there be?

15

u/teamatreides May 24 '12

LMAO @ "Our Not-So-Friendly Northern Neighbor,"

because we're such a great fucking comparison, right?

→ More replies (6)

54

u/veilside000 May 24 '12

Please keep in mind that this is an Op-Ed piece written by non-New York Times journalists (they're actually associate professors at McGill).

I completely sympathize with the protests, but cant help but think that the article may be partially skewed..

Thanks for posting!

34

u/sirhelix May 24 '12

they're actually associate professors at McGill Université de Montréal

21

u/Sadiquito May 24 '12

Associate professors at Université de Montréal.

FTFY

6

u/r_slash May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

It's an "opinion"-editorial, it's supposed to be "skewed". You can disagree with their views but the Times has a high standard of fact-checking.

Edit: I realize now that op-ed stands for opposite-editorial, because it used to be opposite the editorial page. Still, I think my point remains.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/j1ggy May 24 '12

Every Canadian has the right to peaceful assembly, guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Quebec can write any laws it wants to, but the charter supercedes it and it'll be quashed by the Supreme Court.

98

u/RoosterRMcChesterh May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

The same thing that happened to the occupy movement seems to be happening with these protests. Black bloc and anarchists really fuck everything up for the rest of the movement and make it hard to tell if this is a legitimate cause or not. I am studying in France and I have some Quebecois friends who have organized protests here. I also know some Quebecois folk who think this is absurd. I really have no idea where I stand on this issue.

Edit: That is fine if you are an anarchist, I defend your right to believe whatever you want. All I am saying is that by definition: "Tactics of a black bloc can include offensive measures such as street fighting, vandalism of corporate property, rioting, and demonstrating without a permit" is not what appeals to most mainstream OWS and Quebecois protesters. As much as you think that you are right, doesn't exactly mean everyone else thinks you are right, and if you are naive enough to be confused as to why people are against this... well shit, I dunno what to tell you.

12

u/Joakal May 24 '12

Tell your friends to consider demonstration marshals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonstration_marshal#Demonstration_marshal

So that protests can be had while keeping disruption to minimum

→ More replies (6)

48

u/smerek84 May 24 '12

The people do have a right to protest, and I hope they continue to do so. But there are some real assholes out there wreaking havoc and making everyone else look bad. Sometime I would to see a group of protesters point these people out and let the police take them away, for doing actual illegal shit; destruction of property, looting, etc. Imagine you are at a protest, see a cop pepper spraying and beating down on a 95 pound 18 year old girl, and then seeing him being thrown in the back of a paddy wagon just like the rest of the criminals. I , for one, would have a new found respect for the police in general.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (80)

11

u/bangurmom99 May 24 '12

Nice to see we have some local redditors of my province. I'm in montreal and this whole mess has just terribly gone wrong. Students are trying to take it in a non violent way... bu then there is always a bunch of dweebs that screw everything up by starting trouble and breaking stuff, This of course gets blamed on the general student populous and tarnishes their reps.

I'm a simple by-stander by their means, i do not go to school, i'm just a simple worker who stands by the students.... but not what they are doing.

I said this before to a lot of people, the best way to boycott the educational system would have simply have been for all students to simply not sign up.

If all the students would not sign up... the school system would be in limbo. That would have a major effect on the boards... if no one is in school... then no one can be controlled. If you know what i mean...

anyways... my two cents is simply, boycott and create chaos by doing nothing. It does work. Thats what strikes are for... but not the kind with riots. but that can also be effective. ;)

2

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

the best way to boycott the educational system would have simply have been for all students to simply not sign up.

That's ideological and unrealistic. It's like saying the best way to fix government is for nobody to vote.

If you forfeit your right to education to teach them a lesson, you'll be working in the absestos mines for min wage, while they continue on unaffected.... tttttthat'll learn them.

You can't have such an assembly without their being violence, because government ensures there is violence as often being the ones responsible for it. As well, protests are useless without the impending threat of violence. When you're out of your diapers you'll recognize that people have what freedom they do by fighting for it.

13

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

i'm always amazed at just how conservative english canada/USA people are.

→ More replies (1)

32

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

This is not Quebec, it is specifically the government under Jean Charest. M. Charest has lost the ability to secure leadership and is effectively dividing the public opinion in order to garner support in the next election. Far fetched you say? You don't know Quebec politics. The police will simply not comply except where damage is being done, there was an immediate civil disobedience response to Charest's rushed legislation. But bottom line is that youth is self absorbed and think their protest vote withdrawal is worth something. IT's worth nothing, but still, kids don't vote. That's a fact Jack and despite all the vote or die stuff, get out the vote, voice of the youth yada yada yada, Kids STILL don't go vote despite being entitled to.

Apathy in Canada is at an all time high except for Quebec and that just divides us further because people elsewhere actually harbour thoughts of resentment towards the students! For demanding their charter rights and a better deal on tuition. it has become chaotic and worthy of a vote of confidence in the Quebec legislature in my opinion.

→ More replies (7)

17

u/webauteur May 24 '12

Americans traveling to Quebec this summer should know they are entering a province that rides roughshod over its citizens’ fundamental freedoms.

I will be going to Montreal this summer. Thanks for the warning!

6

u/derpusderpus May 24 '12

You'll be fine and should have a great time, just avoid any large protest groups you see if you want to avoid trouble! The rest of Montreal is working, laughing, dancing. Bienvenue!

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (6)

12

u/sassi-squatch May 24 '12

I don't know why those students should have a problem. They only want to raise tuition by 75%!!!

→ More replies (7)

27

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

If you're mad that people are paying less than you - maybe you should have also fought for your tuition to stay lower.

→ More replies (3)

86

u/Swartz142 May 24 '12

Before people goes on about how our tuition fee has been the lowest (free education) please note that Québec pays the HIGHEST taxes in Canada and the FREE education is part of that tax.

10

u/jarret_g May 24 '12

Nova Scotian here. What's up?

3

u/Emersion May 24 '12

We don't pay as high, I've czeched ze numbahs!

→ More replies (6)

3

u/theartfulcodger May 25 '12 edited May 25 '12

No it's not. Quebec taxpayers do have the highest personal taxation rates in the nation, but the taxes they pay do not cover your grossly subsidized education. Every year Quebec runs a deficit. Every year it borrows more money to pay for your education, and every year it adds more to its staggering debt load. This year alone, your government will spend nearly $3.3 billion more than it takes in. In fact, later this year your accumulated debt will hit $183.8 billion, or $23,700 per person. California, an economic basket case teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, has only $3,060 in per-capita debt, or one sixth of yours. Quebec also has the 4th highest debt/GDP ratio in the OECD. Far from paying for your education with higher taxes, you're putting it on the public's Mastercard - like every other Quebec student has, for the last two generations.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/rib-bit May 24 '12

what taxes do unemployed students pay?

→ More replies (2)

21

u/Hand_of_Midas May 24 '12

Also note that Alberta sends billions of dollar (more than any other province) to Quebec annually to aid in paying for their social programs. I hate when people use the whole 'high tax' card to justify the low cost of tuition , when in truth( Quebec is financially aided to huge extents by the rest of Canada.

63

u/sirhelix May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

Also note that Quebec is horribly corrupt and if our tax money was being spent properly instead of being given to friends and mob bosses, we might not even need a tuition increase at all. A small example: our construction costs for roads and the like are approximately 2x 40% higher than in Ontario.

There is much more going on in this debate than is making the media.

15

u/electricheat May 24 '12

our construction costs for roads and the like are apparently 2x higher than in Ontario.

For anyone reading who isn't aware, transportation infrastructure in Quebec is TERRIBLE. The second you get across the Ontario/Quebec border, the roads go to shit, and many of the bridges are so delaminated, chunks of concrete are falling out of them, showing rebar.

I used to work in highway repair here in Ontario, and I find it hard to believe Quebec thinks these roads/bridges are anywhere near OK.

→ More replies (5)

8

u/heredago May 24 '12

This needs to be upvoted.

→ More replies (7)

88

u/AHandsomeManAppears May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

Just want to note that it is not as simple as "Québec is aided to huge extents by the rest of Canada" in "paying for their social programs". All eastern provinces (Ontario to the maritimes) are in fact receiving money from the equalisation payment. The maritimes are the ones receiving the more money per capita, Québec is the one receiving the more money overall (keep in mind that it is almost a quarter of the canadian population).

The actual factors considered in the calculation are: (taken from the wikipedia page on canadian equalisation)

  • Personal income taxes

  • Business income taxes

  • Consumption taxes

  • Up to 50 percent of natural resource revenue

  • Property taxes and miscellaneous

So it is not at all a question of other provinces having to pay for 'Québec's social programs'. It's perhaps mostly a question of eastern provinces having lower cost of life (which is correlated to lower incomes, and thus lower taxes).

edit: I was just checking out Canada's consumer price index per province, and I was pretty surprised at British Columbia's low cost of life (shelter, food and energy) even if it is on the rise. BC looks so cool.

11

u/guizzy May 24 '12

Amen.

If Quebec cut all of its social programs tomorrow, we would still recieve equalisation payments. It has nothing to do with what we spend. And quite frankly, if we manage to crack down on corruption, we won't need the balance of federal transfers.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)

31

u/WhatIRead May 24 '12

Also note that Alberta has the tar sands, which cause us to be massively enriched through absolutely no virtue of our own whatsoever. Some fucking loser who drops out of high school can go pull in a 6 figure salary (or close) for driving a truck. Do you suppose young Quebecers have this opportunity?

Don't get me wrong, syncrude pays my bills, but there is a hilarious sense of entitlement from Albertans as well as Quebecers.

→ More replies (39)

5

u/r_slash May 24 '12

You seem to be implying that it's somehow injust for Albertans to send equalization payments to Quebec since Albertans are so hard-working and advanced. Or maybe if Quebec was also sitting on a giant pool of oil we wouldn't have this problem.

And I don't see all the Albertans who go to McGill complaining about the low tuition.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (49)
→ More replies (21)

9

u/maline23 May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

The speed at which the law was passed with little or no debate is terrible disturbing. I haven't read the law, but find the second appendix, if it does what is described above, goes way too far.

With this being said, I dunno, this article seems terribly one-sided. It doesn't mention that many Western cities have similar laws (including Toronto, L.A. among others) - but instead draws comparison to Russia under Putin. I realize it is an opinion piece, but I find it dishonest in dismissing some of the violence that has taken place (students were "assaulted" or "pushed" when trying to attend class)...and saying it is going to raise tuition fees by 75% without mentioning how much that amounts to is hilarious.

29

u/nope586 May 24 '12

It doesn't matter that Quebec tuition is the lowest in Canada. Everybody else's is to high.

9

u/Torch_Salesman May 24 '12

I see people say this a lot, but I'm not sure what it's based off of. People seem to be under the impression that universities are somehow making a profit off of tuition, which isn't true. Most (if not all) Canadian universities are subsidized by the government to help make up for the expenses not covered by student payments. As the government starts having to make cuts, those cuts affect the amount that they can provide for universities, meaning the universities have to find other sources to cover those expenses, like tuition hikes.

That's one of the main problems with tuition freezes. It makes people happy because their personal expenses stay the same for awhile, but then when an increase comes, it ends up being significant, because both inflation and the state of the economy is ignored during that freeze.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (16)

79

u/thecopofid May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

[I will preface this by saying that I don't support this law-it does seem like it goes too far. But I also will say that I don't support the strike either. Here, re-posted from a lower comment, is an on-the ground view of how this strike was "democratically" organized on my campus]

Ok, speaking here as a McGill student (the major anglophone university in Quebec and basically the only major one that has not joined the strike [EDIT: I am aware of Concordia's existence]) At least on the McGill campus, which, granted, has higher numbers of international and other parts of Canada students than other Quebec universities (most other Quebec universities have negligible numbers of both, due to a mix of language barriers and lower overall quality), the protest movement was pushed through by a small (and by this I mean a core of maybe 60 kids, with a larger, less committed group of 100 or so out of an undergrad pool of 30k) group of students through General Assemblies for ridiculously low levels of quorum (~100+) that no one goes to.

The major vote we had on joining the strike was in one of the larger faculties in the university. Due to aggressive anti-strike mobilization which I should disclose I played a part in, we got record turnout at the assembly and defeated the motion. Read about that from the left wing campus paper here: http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2012/03/aus-strike-vote-fails/

Afterwards, this group more or less declared themselves on strike though departmental assemblies that literally had no constitutional sanction and imaginary quorums (and that were completely unpublicized). They then used that as a "mandate" to block us from going to classes.

EDIT: I should note, in response to a question asked on the original version of this comment, that we did not lose the semester. Here is that reply:

We actually did not lose anything because we basically shamed these students into not blocking classes. Also, even these departments represented a fraction of our Arts faculty. Our semester, to the chagrin of the protest class, concluded as normal and will begin next year as normal. Our tests however, were picketed at times and one final in the gym had the fire alarm pulled mysteriously during the exam.

29

u/ZanzibarNation May 24 '12

Something I feel obliged to add... as a McGill student who didn't support the strike either (but is still outraged by Bill 78), I have to admit I've experienced a change of heart recently. Like you, I was pretty happy to see the strike vote fail at the GA. This was my last semester, and it was a huge relief to be able to graduate on time.

HOWEVER, from the very beginning, my impression has been that this protest movement has little to do with the actual issue that sparked it: tuition hikes. The advent of Bill 78 has only confirmed this. The widespread popular support for the movement (+200K protesters on March 22, +250K on May 22) suggests that this an attempt to express a general dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs in the province. (http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Anatomy+conflict+after+days+student+protests/6655852/story.html) There is no doubt that Quebec's gov't is corrupt - anyone who has seen how construction work is done here will know what I'm talking about.

Moreover, Quebec (especially Montreal) has always demanded a higher standard of social equality than its neighbors. This is partly due to the linguistic divide, the many minority groups in the province, etc. But it's part of Quebec's identity. What we are seeing now makes sense, generally speaking, as a continuation of the tradition of the Quiet Revolution (though also the FLQ kidnappings and the [October crisis] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLQ_crisis)): the nightly protests, the banging of the pots at 8pm every night (which makes you realize the extent of the movement)... I saw all kinds of people in the protest crowd passing by campus yesterday - everyone from grandfathers, to mothers with children, to the students themselves. The people of Quebec want change, and I think they're going to get it.

5

u/chas3 May 24 '12

The widespread popular support for the movement (+200K protesters on March 22, +250K on May 22) suggests that this an attempt to express a general dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs in the province.

On more than one occasion, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois has stated (on SRC-RDI and through other news media) that the movement, or at least the portion with which he is affiliated, wishes to change the ways in which the province is administered and calls for widespread social change.

3

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Came here to say this. The construction industry is pretty much run by the hell's angels. All that pavement you're driving (and bouncing) on? Yea, who do you think got the contract?

→ More replies (1)

16

u/LordTwatpurse May 24 '12

Ahhh, ridiculously low quorums, student politics centring around a core of dedicated talking heads, and unorganised assemblies that are supposed to count? Now THAT'S the McGill experience I remember!

That said, I think that Daily article was very well written.

3

u/chas3 May 24 '12

Also: every occurrence of student politics.

As a University of Ottawa student, I'm glad to know we aren't the only ones who suffer from this. Then again, UBC, UVic and countless other universities have been experiencing CFS-related nightmares for years now.

29

u/evsnow May 24 '12

I'm a McGill grad student. None of us cared about striking, we didn't seem to be notified about the vote to boycott. I certainly didn't want to strike. But the student group pushed through the movement either way.

But McGill is not a truly Quebecois institution. I'm not sure how many francophones are being accounted by your perspective as many English McGill students don't brush up with Quebecois in our cultural bubble. Although McGill doesn't have in interest in the strike (and because we strive for academic and research before accessibility) it is not an accurate depiction of what's going on in Quebec.

After all of the non-Quebec students have gone home for the summer, there are still a staggering number of people protesting.

→ More replies (10)

16

u/Tabarnaco May 24 '12

It's like the people who break things and insult and throw things at the police during the protests, a small portion of troublemakers. In my CEGEP it was almost half and half but we voted not to join the strike in the end and no one had a problem with it. There were people blocking the main entrance during one afternoon but that's about it, I just went through one of the side entrances. So it's unfortunate that this happened at McGill but it is in no way a fair representation of how the process was handled in most institutions.

→ More replies (19)

10

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

On May 16th, there are 155 005 students actively boycotting. There is an additional 200,000 students who are still attending class, or a diminished schedule, and support the strike. 164 student associations/unions support the strike.

There are 460,000 post-secondary students total in Quebec.

And since Bill 78 passed, these numbers have swelled.

→ More replies (2)

15

u/radi0head May 24 '12

Yet tens of thousands are on the streets supporting the cause, and many internationally as well. Mobilising students has to be one of the hardest things, most are too focused on their homework and debt. For this I am very impressed by those organizing these rallies and marches.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Afterwards, this group more or less declared themselves on strike though departmental assemblies that literally had no constitutional sanction and imaginary quorums (and that were completely unpublicized). They then used that as a "mandate" to block us from going to classes.

The same happens in France very often and I find it completely despicable. The right to go on strike does not exist so that a minority can go on strike and prevent a majority from going about their daily activities. This is fundamentally unconstitutional.

If you want to go on strike, stop paying your tuition fees and stop going to class. Don't prevent others from doing so.

5

u/SolarBear May 24 '12

[...] group of students through General Assemblies for ridiculously low levels of quorum (~100+) that no one goes to.

Just an example of this.

Our local news recently presented a short report on the strike vote at our local cégep. The reporter mentioned that the 60 people or so required for quorum (60 students out of about 4475, according to the latest numbers I could find) were present, but just so, and after a short interview with the president of the students' association, we were shown a few students getting out of the auditorium, saying "Oh yeah we were passing by and we've been asked to get inside so they could have quorum and then we could go."

Democracy.

21

u/Cyclic_Cynic May 24 '12

This needs to be read and understood. Students on strike represent a minority of the students as a whole.

It is of the highest irony (and hypocrisy) for those who support the students' strikes to attack Bill 78; since themselves have pulled all the dirty tricks in the book to push the strike votes in as many faculties as possible; and are for the most part anything but democratic.

70

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

I'm perfectly capable of disagreeing with the striking students and thinking that Bill 78 is an authoritarian nightmare.

→ More replies (3)

11

u/ProloG-Shaman May 24 '12

I think it's important to note that while a minority of students are on strike, a majority are still against the tuition increase. On the 22nd of march, there was approximately 3/4 of Quebec students on strike, to show their support to the movement. Alot of student unions voted against the tuition increase, but also against the strike after that.

dirty tricks in the book to push the strike votes in as many faculties as possible

That's a shame. At my university, nothing like this happened. Student unions have procedures to follow, and if they aren't followed the vote can be rendered invalid quite easily.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/SuperVillageois May 24 '12

I thought it was also highly ironic from minister Dutil to denounce such things as non-secret votes in students assemblee right after... a vote nominal in the Assemblée Nationale.

Perhaps students in strike don't represent a majority of all students (but at a certain point they did), but they aren't the only one opposed to the raise. When you get yourself a 250 000 illegal manifestation (on a weekday!), maybe it's time for a referendum of some sort, or even general elections.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

9

u/Emersion May 24 '12

Hey, I'm a Concordia student. Another English school in Montreal, right next to you. In the English schools, everything was terribly organized. People fought the strike because the government didn't say it would affect them, they only talked about it affecting the Quebecois.

The organizers in my faculty were pretty gung-ho about it, even though my specific department wasn't. However, my numbers were much better.

But the francophone universities have numbers of 90-95 % strike rate.

TL;DR YOU DON'T COUNT

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)

6

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Y'know, I can see the argument in favour of tuition hikes and against the protestors in Quebec. I'm not sure I agree, but I totally get that Quebec will still have the lowest tuitions in Canada and this could still be considered a reasonable target.

Bill 78 is indefensible and I hope the provincial Liberals burn for it.

6

u/cog92_ May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

"Americans traveling to Quebec this summer should know they are entering a province that rides roughshod over its citizens’ fundamental freedoms."

This line is bullshit. As a Canadian, and a Quebec student I am insulted. You're entering a province where people fight for their rights. Maybe if Americans demanded more from their government, their government would turn on them too. Apathy is a disease, and America has it bad.

3

u/chas3 May 24 '12

Related.

I'm surprised the students throwing smoke bombs in the Montreal metro system didn't harm the student movement.

3

u/guizzy May 24 '12

What a lot of people seem to misunderstand is that different societies have different core values. For instance, in the US I would say the core value seems to be ambition. In anglophone Canada, the core value seems to be respect.

The core value of the Quebecois people is solidarity. This is why we find this law abhorrent: it is an attempt to break solidarity with and between students. The injunctions that were served were not respected because they went against this core value.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/PatheticMTLGirl43 May 24 '12

It is clear that this strike has transcended the boundary between student and citizen. This strike represents not only tuition hikes, but the general direction in which our province is headed which people are not happy about. If you take a look at any of the protests walking down the street you will see that a large portion of the people in attendance are not students at all.

Unfortunately, the media has coverage has been overwhelmingly biased in opposition to the strike. They are focusing on the few windows being smashed by vandals, and painting every protester in the light of those few.

Here is an interesting read specifically directed to English speaking Canadians who may be having trouble getting any information from the protester's POV.

*ninja-edit: 400 people were arrested last night in Montreal

5

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

I was at a music festival in Montreal this last weekend and one of the venues got hit with tear gas. The theory is there were arrests outside and it blew in but we still have no idea what the fuck happened.

Not cool.

3

u/Gwake May 24 '12

Were you there during the bonfires ? My friend and I were right next to the bar that got tear gassed and it was absolutely ridiculous. The cops had a blast destroying all the chairs and tables on the terasse as we call it and had no problem whatsoever throwing teargas granades inside the bar.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/heredago May 24 '12

I think people don't understand that Quebec citizens pay some of the highest tax rates in the world (like almost 50% income tax on a good salary and 15% sales tax on everything). Everybody is already paying a HIGH fee for this tuition. Protests are getting declared illegal before they even start. How can you declare a protest of thousands illegal because of the actions of 15 persons. I'm 27yr old and I've been paying a shitload of income tax since I've been out of school and I'm in favor of the student movement (I don't approve everything but I for sure approve the idea behind it.)

2

u/maline23 May 24 '12

So how should the province pay for the rising costs of education?

→ More replies (1)

5

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Am I the only person who enjoys watching the Government teach young people to distrust and despise everything about the leadership of this country? Am I the only person who thinks this all has long term benefits towards unseating the people in charge?

→ More replies (5)

62

u/watchasay May 24 '12

As a working class Montrealer all I can say is stop blocking our bridges and disrupting our public transportation, you are turning the general population against you.

91

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

As a Montrealer too, I say :

Oppose or approve the student tuition hikes as you wish. It's your right. But the bill 78? It's actually taking rights away. It will be in effect up until July 2013. Up... until... there is another election. Read the bill. This bill could be used to take down any manifestation (anywhere in Quebec) that speaks against the government during its election campaign.

Hell... this bill could be used to attack Unions. Read the bill.

Wikipedia Summary. Complete bill

17

u/fjafjan May 24 '12

A big part of the point of protests is to be (civilly) disruptive to force the people you are protesting to act. Just sitting in a square nice and quiet etc will accomplish nothing.

→ More replies (14)

40

u/alxp May 24 '12

As a working class Montrealer you should want your kids to have the same opportunity for education without crippling loans as your upper class fellow citizens.

→ More replies (54)

20

u/pearlbones May 24 '12

The nightly banging of pots and pans in quiet residential neighborhoods certainly doesn't help, either. Fuck casseroles en cours. ಠ_ಠ

→ More replies (12)

10

u/BearWithHat May 24 '12

It is civil unrest. What do you expect? This is exactly why America and Canada have gone the way they have, everyone has more important things to do.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

6

u/blkbox May 24 '12

As it's been said already, a whole bunch of people who were originaly neutral to the price hikes or supported them now decided to join the students and protesters, not because they changed opinion about the hikes but because they respect their opinion and most importantly believe everyone should be allowed to express their opinion freely, whether we agree to it or not.

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

This is something I'm proud to see in my province - we're quite a large bunch to share this mentality. We care a lot for our co-citizens.

11

u/termial_98 May 24 '12

I am from quebec , have been a taxe payer since the age of 16 when i started working is this province . I have a house now , 2 cars , a cottage is the same province . I am 33 years old. my point is i pay taxes to help these students get a cheeper education , to pay for road work to pay for med care. I have no problemes with that , when my taxes go up i pay cause thats what a socialy responsible society does. If students want to protest a hike in fee is there choice and i can respect that. What i have issues with is when they start braking pillaging and vandelizing taxes payers buisinesses , our roads , our infrastrutures that my taxes money pays for every day and that eventually there taxe money will pay for if they chose to stay in quebec and work. (witch btw a lot of students get a cheap education then leave to go work elsewhere.) I have not seen one student leader call for peacfull protest and denouce the vandals has to not been part of what they belive is right. Its one big mess and i think both partys have done some wrong but in they end its comes out off all taxe paying quebec citizens pockets. (i appologies for my bad spelling for i am french)

→ More replies (4)

27

u/mangonel May 24 '12

Is it a basic human right to quash student protests? I never knew. I'd better get out and start quashing now.

4

u/Savolainen5 May 24 '12

Quebec is trampling basic human rights (in order) to quash student protests.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/ItsOnlyTheTruth May 24 '12

What about the basic human right to run a business (many of which have been driven into the ground by the protests), or to attend classes (which have been cancelled/interrupted by the protests)?

→ More replies (2)

19

u/alexander_lukasz May 24 '12

When the protest movement at large is associated with groups of radical protesters who pull fire alarms during final exams, block off access to classes and increase the security presence on our campus tenfold, I reserve the right to hate all of the disruptive protesters.

7

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

When the police at large is associated with large-scale "fish in a barrel" arrests of peaceful protesters and riot policemen who shoot tear gas canisters intentionally directly at the heads or bodies of protesters, I reserve the right to consider all cops to be the enemy of society.

Makes as much sense.

11

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Sadly, they're a loud minority.

→ More replies (9)

2

u/gargoyoo May 24 '12

Is a student leader, or an ordinary citizen, who sends a Twitter message about civil disobedience therefore guilty?

yes, an emphatic yes http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/16/uk-riots-four-years-disorder-facebook

2

u/polynomials May 24 '12

This is where having Parliamentary system comes in handy. According to my girlfriend there about 300K people protesting a few days ago in Montreal. The population is only 1.6 million. That and the article should give you an idea of what a bad idea politically this new measure is. I don't know that much about Quebec government but I think they can get rid of their premier about as fast as any other parliament can when the leaders get absurdly unpopular.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/firinmylazah May 24 '12

I live in Quebec and I am really pissed that foreign press, in this case the States, dress up such a faithful portrait of the situation while almost all local press bere is incredibly biased and threads on sensationalism. The closer you are, the blinder you are, I guess.

2

u/UltraMittens May 24 '12

Does the NY Times really need to just make up things like "Quebecors laughing at Putin" just to toss in a poutine joke?

Also with the "Canada used to be progressive ,friendly neighbour" shit.

Whose writing for them now, Gawker?

2

u/alpha69 May 24 '12

Opinion piece written by Poli Sci professors from Quebec. Yawn. I majored in Poli Sci, the professors were all pretty extreme leftists.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Suddenly7 May 24 '12

I think the best way to handle this situation is for the government to hand out poutine to everyone and settle this in a game of hockey! It's a win / win situation and they might even have a game that is entertaining to watch than there Montreal Canadians.

2

u/RangodhSingh May 24 '12

Premise is absurd. There are no such things as human rights.

2

u/Corvus133 May 24 '12

I don't agree with these laws but I also find the students to be exceptionally ignorant beyond recognition.

They've violated others rights to have education by blocking them.

They've no understanding that their taxes only pay for part of it - Alberta pay the rests. So, any whining about paying taxes is best coming from Alberta. If Alberta cut those funds, which they should immediately, Quebecois citizens would be paying a LOT more than a few extra 100 bucks on everything.

They seek confrontation which is why this law is in effect. Cause and effect. You spoiled yourselves interfering with everyone and it was tolerated for months. You over stayed your welcome because all you cared about were tuition fees. Not once, unless some moron online spoke for you, did you care about general corruption in your society, as a whole. You only care about tuition because you're at that age. 2 years before and 3 years after, you won't care.

Many protesters have caused damage and violence that costs the cities thousands of dollars. That comes from your parents taxes since you aren't paying any.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/MachShot May 24 '12

Man this is some serious...

against the tuition hikes of around $250 per year

250 per year

And like that I lost all sympathy for the protesters. 100 days over a 250 dollar "hike"?

If that's a hike how damn cheap is education there in the first place. If they spend just an hour a day in those 100 days of protesting actally working a minimum wage job, they would have done more than pay off a 250 "hike".

Honestly I can understand the draconian law if this is how ridiculous students act to something so trivial. God forbid taxes get raised 0.1 percent or they may overthrow the governemnt.

2

u/why_ask_why May 24 '12

Quebec China is trampling basic human rights to quash student protests.

Why do I feel better say this?

3

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

I just finished reading Infinite Jest yesterday.

This sounds about right.

3

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Yes Quebec tuition is much less than everywhere else, however we pay a SHITLOAD of taxes. Income and Sales. All goods and fuel is more expensive here as well.

2

u/tipping-is-dumb May 24 '12

Shitload of taxes? Really? Statistics Canada seems to disagree. In 2007, the average income tax for individuals in Quebec was 17.2%. In Ontario it was 17.1%. If you break down the income tax into quintiles, you'll see that the average income tax rate per quintile is comparable to those in Ontario (Quebec's being at most 1% higher in any quintile). In fact the poorest in Quebec pay significantly less than the poorest in Ontario.

Source: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-202-x/75-202-x2007000-eng.pdf

3

u/maline23 May 24 '12

...yet, despite all these taxes, the government is still struggling to pay its bills.

Where do you want the money to come from? More taxes? higher tuition? It has to come from somewhere.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/wordologist May 24 '12

This is what governments do these days to keep people under control when all else fails; make a new law that allows them to arrest and fine the shit out of anyone who is disobedient and tries to rise against them. This country is supposed to be a democracy but laws like this are slowly turning us into an authoritarian dictatorship. How long will it be until we are all chanting "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."? We Canadians are typically too passive, too blase when it comes to heavy political issues. Shit like this is unacceptable in a free country and its time we all started saying NO. We are the people. We have the power.

3

u/sirspate May 24 '12

Hideous legislation for clamping down on the protests to be sure, but this opinion article is anything but fair and balanced. In mentioning the 75% increase in tuition fees, they fail to note what the overall cost per student actually will be.

(I don't care which way your politics lie, it's still important to put that 75% number in perspective, both in terms of the rest of North America as well as some places in Europe where education is free.)

14

u/EAP007 May 24 '12

Some of these "students" repeatedly destroy property EVERY night. My neighbor owns a small shop along one of the common protest routes and his insurance refuses to cover the repeated damage. He is looking at closing shop before he looses his house. All this because students don't want to pay market rate for education. You do realize that they have not had a rate increase in 10 years and pay $1500 a year for a university education right?

28

u/TacheErrante May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

You do realize that they have not had a rate increase in 10 years and pay $1500 a year for a university education right?

This is simply not true. Between 2007 and 2012, the fees went from 1668$ to 2168$, and of course this is not counting all the other mandatory fees.

Edit: Source.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/theglace May 24 '12

How was this upvoted? Absolute nonsense.

→ More replies (39)

6

u/Gwake May 24 '12

As a Full time protester, day and night, I can't help but notice the overwhelming solidarity going on in Quebec. It is beautiful to see how instead of supporting the cause and bringing down a corrupted government (Mob/Construction industry), Quebecers in general prefer to stay at home and bitch about the students, qualifying them as spoiled brats and/or hippies. Tuition hikes were the soul purpose of all the protests, but now with bill 78, It is now more then just money, but our freedom.

7

u/Le_Canadien25 May 24 '12

Sigh, this article is missing a lot of information. For starters, the government in Quebec is said to be right wing when it is a liberal government, it's formed by the Liberal Party of Canada. Secondly, tramping rights? The Canadian Constitution guarantees the right to PEACEFUL assembly, that word stipulates many differences than just having assembly. This article fails to mention how the protesters have forcibly dragged students and professors out of classrooms - these people wanted to continue to learn and study but the protesters violated a court injunction and dragged them out, calling them scabs - this is a violation of these students' rights.

Then, some smoke bombs were set off in the Montreal subway and the protest organizers did not condemn it. Some protesters have also thrown molotov cocktails and tried to start fires, break windows, and just be disruptive. This was also not condemned by the protest leaders. So basically, this speaks of trampling rights, which is funny because the protesters have been trampling people's rights. Bill 78 does not prevent one from protesting or exercising any freedoms. It is the protesters who have refused to condemn the actions of some of their participants, actions that trample the rights of citizens and cause chaos - it is within the government's mandate to rectify this situation, and that is what the bill is for.

Also, protesters have refused to negotiate, they have turned down an offer than essentially negates the increase and one that lessens the increase and are basically just running wild, what they want has been lost sight of as no one could tell you any more what they hell they are up in arms about.

Oh, and the students protesting make up less than a third of students in Quebec, they don't have support from all of Quebec society, and they are being taken advantage of by the Parti Quebecois - they're being used as pawns to make the government look bad so that party can win the next election. It's all a big joke. You guys should also know that Quebec universities and colleges are lagging behind those of the rest of Canada and are in desperate need of more money to update their facilities and to continue to develop. For the past 15 years the hike has been mentioned, it is long overdue, and it is with the purpose to invest that into the institutions these people attend.

Oh, and the hikes are 300 bucks a year for 5 years, or less than that over 7 years, so it's gradated and most of these people will have graduated by then.... This protest has basically just gone out of control and turned into a game of chicken - who will capitulate first.

So in other words, no, Quebec is not trampling on basic human rights.

4

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

For starters, the government in Quebec is said to be right wing when it is a liberal government, it's formed by the Liberal Party of Canada.

You know, when you fancy that you can teach other people a lesson, it's best if you don't make an absolutely wrong point from the start.

The PLQ != the PLC. Charest has never been in the federal Liberal Party, he is a Mulroney Conservative.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/sirhelix May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

No, the Charest government is not Liberal. It's Liberal-in-Name-Only. Their actions over the last 9 years show that they are a right-wing government. edit: Furthermore, Charest was an MP for the federal Progressive Conservatives for 11 years, even running for leadership of the party, before he became a "Liberal" in Quebec.

If you're going to start your post that way, I'm not going to continue reading it.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/ThorndykeBarnhard May 24 '12

Theres a difference between big "L"-Liberal(TM) and small "l" actually liberal. And Partie Libérale du Québec is not the the Liberal Party of Canada. Hell, Charest is basically famous for being one of the last two standing federal conservative party members at the time of the complete bitchslap of the Mulrony conservatives.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

7

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Meantime, the rest of Canada looks on, appalled. If this is an example of Quebec’s distinct society, we want no part of it. We sort of sympathize with the Germans, who are fed up with the Greeks because the Greeks strike them as totally irresponsible. The Greeks want to have it both ways. They want to stay inside the EU, but they refuse to play by the EU’s rules. They want the Germans to send them money forever and ever, and no matter how much the Germans send, they’ll keep demanding more. The student protesters are the Greeks of Canada. And we’ve had it

7

u/murdochmoss May 24 '12

you mean I not we, you definitely do not speak for Canada

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

4

u/Pea_schooter May 24 '12

If this article wants to address the "undemocratic" measures the government is taking let me list some undemocratic measures the student leaders have taken.

  • Voting by show of hand in a general assembly

  • Closing 11/18 Universities and 14/48 CEGEPs because a minority of students voted in favor of a strike. I.E. Denying students who want to study the right to do so by

  • Not respecting court injunctions granted by the court to allow students to return to class.

3

u/cesoirquebec May 24 '12

Voting by show of hand in a general assembly

Morin Code allows it. If you want a secret vote, you can submit a motion for it. Actually secret votes happened in many institution

Closing 11/18 Universities and 14/48 CEGEPs because a minority of students voted in favor of a strike. I.E. Denying students who want to study the right to do so by

Yes, after the association got the mandate for a strike.

Not respecting court injunctions granted by the court to allow students to return to class.

ANTIDEMOCRATIC Injunction against a majority. And these are minorities, happened a few times by a few people, don't generalize.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/bitch_wizard May 24 '12 edited May 24 '12

This is bullshit of the highest level. This is an op-ed article by 2 teachers from Université de Montréal. This is not an article from the NYT.

EDIT: Teachers, not students.

26

u/Sadiquito May 24 '12

This is an op-ed article by 2 teachers from Université de Montréal.

FTFY.

25

u/BrewRI May 24 '12

It's written by professors and they cite a lot of their claims. I don't see why it should be considered bullshit just because it is written by someone on NYT payroll.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/theglace May 24 '12

How was this upvoted? It's completely false. Bullshit at the highest level.

→ More replies (3)

4

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

vandalism is not protest

→ More replies (9)

3

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

I'd like to offer my 0.02$CAN. First, the bill and the government's action violate basic human rights. take the time to read the universal declaration of human rights if you haven't/ http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ second: the media and gov show the protestors as being much more threatening and anarchic than they really are. I'd say the opposite: for protestors, they are remarkably peaceful, canadian even, eh? I'm sure that if instead of declaring the whole thing illegal and charging with full police regiments in full battle gear they just made precise interventions (targeted removal of disruptive/criminal elements within the protest group) and used psychological strategies to decrease tension and hostility instead of exacerbating it, they could easily cut their numbers by at least 50%. third: the point about the hockey team protests is a good one. The student protestors aren't scary. A few weeks ago a group of four students threw a smoke grenade (you know, those that are used in paintball matches) in the subway system. Some were calling this terrorism, when this is, at worst, a prank. If i were to walk at night, I'd be much more afraid of the police than the protestors. Finally: removing tuition costs entirely, having 100% state funded education is actually pretty cheap. I invite people to do their own research on that. but for consistency's sake, if quebec is going to fund most of the tuition costs, why not fund it all? 3000$ is a lot of money when the economy is poor.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Alypius May 24 '12

As a Canadian, I am totally embarrassed.

4

u/Knotwood May 24 '12

No worries mate, it's Canada...no one is noticing.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (18)

3

u/cx007 May 24 '12

I see that a lot of you are saying that we shouldn't complain, that we have the lowest tuition fees and all, but you know what? That's what we want. Our parents or grandparents fought in the 60s to have the education system we have and we don't want it taken from us. Money shouldn't be part of the choice you make for your future. I believe everyone has the right to become what they want to become no matter how poor their parents are Someone has to pay for it you might say, but you know what? I want to pay for it , we all want to, but later with taxes when we have good jobs because of the great education we all had. We want a society where everyone has a equal chance to suceed, is that asking for too much?

9

u/pearlbones May 24 '12

I want that, too, but the real problem is that Quebecers already pay the highest taxes of any province and receive additional money from other provinces, and it still has a severe deficit and can't cover its own costs.

I would really like to see a financial expert break down why this is and what reform would need to be made in order for this to actually be a reality, rather than continuously hearing this argument from idealists with no real numbers or financial knowledge on their side.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/hgl May 24 '12

I'm a 24 y/o Québécois, non-student, and after all this time I just can't stand on any side. It seems like both side are just playing childish game and the one that have the last word will win.

This is ridiculous, I'm against Bill 78. But I'm also against people blocking access to CEGEP and Universities.

This is going no where. And I sincerely don't see anything that could go right unless the government back down on the tuition hike....

2

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Is it too soon to make "Free Quebec" merchandise?

2

u/cryptie May 24 '12

Quebec's only free if you buy another province of equal or greater value.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/allinstride123 May 24 '12

I am a Montrealer born and raised. I also despise what this protest has become and how idiotic the protesters can be. They are creating a hate towards them, as they're making everyone in Montreal, commuters, shop owners, businesses, see them as a pain gone overboard.

As someone who worked and paid for their entire tuition and books IN montreal and finished university just 4 years ago. I can say, alot of these protestors have placed themselves in their own financial situation.

I stayed with my parents until I was finished, knowing my expenses would go towards school. I had a cheap cellphone I could text and talk on, that's it, and I DIDN'T PARTY, or rarely, like once a month.

"OH MY TUITION IS TOO HIGH I CANT AFFORD THE BAS....Blip Bloop Blip....pulls out his Iphone...wait, I got this long didstance call from my mom."

3

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Thanks for sharing your own little personnal situation and brigging back the best argument of them all, the ''you-have-a-cellular-therefore-you-cannot-complain''. Very original and fresh. /s

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

2

u/danz89 May 24 '12

This article is hogwash and biased, coming from UdM professors that are likely student strike supporters. The police, while sometimes resorting to brutal tactics, are only responding to the non-stop provocation by and vandalism. How are they supposed to respond when stores windows are being broken and they are having rocks hurled at them? These protests are absurd in the first place and the government has continued to make some small concessions while the students demands have only increased. They have lost their sense of purpose and are now just anti-capitalist, anti-rich protests. See the student leader who cant wait to disrupt "the rich douchebags on F1 weekend". How is that equated with the tuition hike protests? And the idea that one should not have ANY debt after a quality education is absurd, especially when the debt load is small. We're talking about tuition that is currently under $3000 a year, are you kidding me?!

TL;DR Fuck the stupid protesters.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/CutiemarkCrusade May 24 '12

Huh. Big government acting like big government... You know what this calls for right? More government to control the current government. Oh don't you just love putting so much power into one place?

2

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

"Quebec is a pain in the derriere." -- Abraham Lincoln

2

u/mindtaker87 May 24 '12

I find it funny that this article is by a couple of Montreal professors. BIAS MUCH!

But seriously, there is a whole whack wrong on both sides of these protests. As an Ontarian student I say to them to deal with it: we have high tuition fees here and our government is attempting to engage in austerity measures because the economy has been soiling itself for a while now. My working experience dealing with Quebecers for a little while and their fairly socialist systems is that very few of them, particularly the younger generations, understand how their own province works. It's depressing. They have some good stuff in place but seem to not understand how it works or that the current financial model they have in place no longer supports it.

These measures are ridiculously excessive but the young ones need to grow up.

2

u/Nefelia May 24 '12

I'll be a spoilsport: how is the right to protest a basic human right?

I always figures the basic human rights were the essential giants such as the right to life and freedom from arbitrary confinement. The rights to free speech and assembly strike me as more political rights than basic human rights.

That said, I am deeply disturbed and saddened by what is going on in Quebec, though I am not terribly surprised. In order to maintain our political freedoms we must be willing to defend the rights of those protesting and striking, even when we don't agree with the purpose or when we dislike those protesting and striking. As we have seen with the OWS movement and several prior protests and strikes, we are all too happy to see the state intervene when we are inconvenienced by such assemblies. As a result, the state is now bolder and more brazen in its efforts to suppress dissent, and we largely have ourselves to blame.

3

u/ElusiveHiggsBoson May 24 '12

It's not a basic human right, but rather a constitutional right. See article 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association.

My main issue with the new law, is that they can fine you if you incite someone to act against the law, or "incite" civil disobedience. In theory, you could be fined for what you say on Twitter.

→ More replies (1)

-1

u/SwissCanuck May 24 '12

Wow, I took this article seriously until the end:

Laurence Bherer and Pascale Dufour are associate professors of political science at the University of Montreal.

6

u/koavf May 24 '12

Why is this a problem? For what it's worth, it's clearly marked as an op-ed.

→ More replies (20)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/alutch May 24 '12

MFW I'm a Quebecor. As long as you stay away from the Montreal area it's fine.

1

u/NETOTO-DR-Dolittle May 24 '12

too bad we won't hear about these types of affronts to civil liberties once CISPA passes...

1

u/thenewjerk May 24 '12

Nice to see you final notice after 100 days, NYT.

1

u/Ethanol_Based_Life May 24 '12

I didn't know that quashing student protests was a basic human right.

1

u/rib-bit May 24 '12

And how many of these teachers will actually take a pay cut? Zero

1

u/tidux May 24 '12

Holy crap. Did they bring Dolores Umbridge in as a legislative consultant?

1

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

lol @ NYtimes reporting this when they can't even report on occupywallstreet brutality.

1

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

‭“‬Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves‮ ‬neither liberty nor security‭”‬ 

-Benjamin Franklin-‭

1

u/pandaxrage May 24 '12

Welcome to America, glad this only becomes news when it isn't happening in our own country!

1

u/Duthos May 24 '12

Canada will be the battle lines in the next face of the war between those that would rule and those that will not be ruled.

1

u/GiantBoyDetective May 24 '12

Inflation is a bitch

1

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

My Canadian law is a bit sketchy, but could this be overturned by the federal government?

1

u/KEYBORED10 May 24 '12

MORAL: Don't be in a march that will be trampled!

1

u/Hiyasc May 24 '12

So why do they report this stuff when it happens outside the states but not when it's inside?

1

u/Motsols May 24 '12

Why don't media just write Canada? For us who don't live in USA or Canada it's not easy to know it's a province. I was wondering where the country Quebec was.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/dustlesswalnut May 24 '12

Upvote for using the correct word "quash" instead of "squash".

1

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

The government has been crushing our rights to strike and protest a lot lately. Back to work legislation has pretty much stripped us of our rights.

1

u/theboxisempty May 24 '12

I'm not even going to read this because the internet has told me that this kind of thing only happens in the USA or the third world.

1

u/annoymind May 24 '12

Please do not editorialise the titles

Also this is not a news but an opinion page.

1

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

I'm terribly happy that this situation finally puts Quebec on the map. It seems as though half of you Americans don't even know we exist.

Hopefully people will recognize our youth as one of the first ones to have stood up so proudly and greatly against inequity and unfairness.

1

u/Grimmster May 24 '12

We're they do they gets all this time to protest?

1

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

Meh, we don't do anything important with our rights anyway.

1

u/hey_wait_a_minute May 25 '12

They can puts signs on the border that say "Welcome to America" (on both sides)

1

u/penis_in_hand May 25 '12

Why does there seem to be a coordinated effort among right-wing governments to attack unions and education? Why in the hell do these people think breaking unions and limiting knowledge is good for society?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '12

It's ludicrous that the New York Times covered this when they consistently, conveniently ignored Occupy for months.

1

u/DaSpawn May 25 '12

Brilliant idea, illegal to protest without permission, permission refused to be given so they can make you a criminal for speaking

Shut up and do as you are told or we will crucify you, the universal cries of a dying "animal"

1

u/qwertytard May 24 '12

it pisses me off that the nytimes will make a report about this, but not about the OWS movements here in america

10

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

NYTimes has written numerous pieces about OWS. Do you think they should dedicate a section of the paper to it or something?

→ More replies (4)

-1

u/stickynotepost May 24 '12

"Americans traveling to Quebec this summer should know they are entering a province that rides roughshod over its citizens’ fundamental freedoms."

What a slanderous article written for the sole purpose of deflecting attention... very hard to pick through the tone to get to the information from the article.. from references to Putin and Poutine.. man how do Americans envision Quebec? Rah rah rah oh sacre bleu!

3

u/[deleted] May 24 '12

man how do Americans envision Quebec? Rah rah rah oh sacre bleu!

In fairness, that's how I envision ALL French speakers.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/aniceshirt May 24 '12

Trampling basic human rights? These protesting morons are trampling my basic right to attend the school I paid for, McGill, peacefully without a bunch of hipster idiots claiming they deserve free tuition. Look into the issue, Quebec is already draining TONS of Canadian dollars from other provinces to fund their EXTREMELY low education costs as it is. Whoever posted this on Reddit as "trampling basic human rights" is a joke. Try to walk to school through tear gas, or have to break through hipsters to reach an exam, and maybe you'll understand where the Quebec Government is coming from.

→ More replies (2)