Grex Storage Conference

View Responses

Grex Storage Item 57: Oh, Canada? [linked]
Entered by mwarner on Tue Oct 31 01:26:45 UTC 1995:

As of 8:20 p.m. this evening (10-30-95) Quebec's vote to seek separation
from Canada shows .5 percent (.005) of votes counted with 55% in favor.

8 responses total.

#1 of 8 by mwarner on Tue Oct 31 02:21:03 1995:

Newt Gingrich's soundbite today on this event records his opinion that
people (insert your favorite Newt hyperbolic adjective) supporting
bilingual education should take the events in Quebec as an object lesson
in the (IFNHA) dangerous risk to the U.S. of bilingualism.

  I can't help but observe something of the opposite:  That the risk in
Canada (if it is such) is created by a culture (Quebec's) that is intent
on maintaining a single language as official (at least by various
legislation and by broad implication of this referendum). 

  Is Newt saying French should have been stamped out early in the History
of Canada?  Duh.  Or that he equates the constitutional situation in
Canada to the U.S.?  Double Duh.

#2 of 8 by mwarner on Tue Oct 31 02:38:12 1995:

Real time coverage of the Canadian referendum is available on the web at:

 www.cfra.com

  With 60% of the votes counted the tally is even with a fractional lead
being held by the "Yes" side (<1%)


  And now "No" has 50.05%.  It's beginning to look like "No" is "poised
for a modest victory" with the issue too close for any certain call.

#3 of 8 by srw on Tue Oct 31 07:22:30 1995:

For those without web access, this is what was on the site at
2:20 AM:

   With all of the votes counted, it's an official narrow victory
for the No forces in the Quebec referendum.
   The No side won 49.6 per cent of the vote while the Yes camp was
supported by 48.5 per cent.
      The No side beat the Yes side by about 52-thousand votes.
   And 86-thousand ballots, or 1.8 per cent of the vote, were
declared spoiled.
   Almost 4.7-million of Quebec's more than five-million eligible
voters turned out at the polls.

#4 of 8 by ajax on Wed Nov 1 04:24:50 1995:

What does "1.8% of the votes were declared spoiled" mean?

#5 of 8 by mwarner on Wed Nov 1 05:08:59 1995:

Ballots that were cast but ruled invalid.  (torn, improperly marked, not
marked, etc.).

#6 of 8 by srw on Thu Nov 2 06:41:18 1995:

The head of the separatist part resigned in the defeat. It was a very
slight defeat. Will Canada find a way to avoid becoming plural next time?

#7 of 8 by ajax on Thu Nov 2 08:20:57 1995:

That's a lot of ballots to toss out...wonder why it was so high?  I doubt
it's anywhere near that high in the US.

It seems like Canada could make some concessions toward granting Quebec
greater autonomy, to avoid a separation next time...wonder what it would
take.

#8 of 8 by mwarner on Thu Nov 2 22:50:05 1995:

Quebec has not signed on to the new Canadian constitution.  A post
constitutional accord reached a couple years ago (at Meach <sp?> Lake)
which addressed some of Quebec's "distinct society" concerns was not
ratified because all the provinces did not ultimately agree to the formula.
 In theory this accord would have been a precursor to Quebec accepting
participation in the Canadian constitution.

  The percentage of spoiled votes may be high, but I understand that there
was a greater percentage of ballots spoiled in the last national Canadian
election.

  According to an article I saw in the AA News the other day, French
culture and language in Quebec was actively suppressed by church and
government during what came to be known as the "dark decades" earlier in
this century until fairly recently.  It seems some of the current events
are an outgrowth of these events.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.