“Pro-Quebec independence politicians pounced on the remarks, which arrived on the eve of a major Parti Québécois policy convention. About 1,400 people are expected.”
It sounds like these politicians are simply just blowing this out of proportion in an attempt to further push their own agenda. Like the pro-BREXIT politicians in Britain, these politicians will do anything for their own political gain. In the end, the only people that will suffer are regular people.
If Quebec leaves Canada, at best their economy will be in ruin, at worst they’ll be American within a year.
Harbinger2001 on
I think Carney has a huge blind-spot when it comes to Quebec. He needs a trusted advisor to help him navigate the dangerous waters of Quebec federal politics.
RiverOaksJays on
Mark Carney would have failed his Canadian History exam in Grade 10 with his comments on the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. He has a francophone Quebec Chief of Staff. Surely, he would be aware of what happened during the Battle.
ImpossibleTonight977 on
It’s not a blind spot, it’s Quebec nationalists quoting selectively the whole thing.
As a Quebecer I’m sick and tired of these people speaking on my name.
Yes, optics don’t look good, carney was too nuanced and two things out of a long speech was selectively put out there.
KukalakaOnTheBay on
Pequistes and crypto-Pequistes in the CAQ criticize Carney. Sovereignty was a boomer dream and I don’t see they’ll find the kind of saliency again that existed among people that, say, grew up in the 1960s or even can remember the times before.
It is an interesting insight into his perspective on Canadian history, one in which he praises
>“the resilience of Francophones. A resilience sometimes quiet, often combative, but always determined to preserve a language, a culture, and an identity.“
and acknowledges a path of three peoples, English, French, and Indigenous, forced together by the results of that battle. It is very clear he is talking about that battlefield as a point where these peoples were brought together into Canada, not praising the battle itself or anything ridiculous like that as commenters here are suggesting.
He even goes further to acknowledge the horrors of that time, the deportation of the Acadians and the oppression faced by French people in Canada. He talks about the Durham report, something I see people specifically criticizing him for not doing in these comments. Read his words, not this strange and absurd bastardization of them.
ore-aba on
Carney better soon learn how careful he must be when saying anything Québec! His statement was factually correct, despite the negative reaction.
Had the French won and held Nouvelle France, Quebec would in all likelihood end up much like Louisiana, sold by Napoleon to the Americans forty-four years later. Now look at how much french is left in Louisiana, street names and places perhaps, not much else. Almost no one born in Louisiana speaks french as a first language, the ones who do are living in borrowed time. A stark contrast with the very much alive Québécois culture of nowadays.
As horrible as the British rule may have been, the Québécois were allowed to keep their laws, their language and their way of life! That’s the accommodation Carney referred to.
In the history of colonial control, there’s usually not any good happening for the colonized. It would serve Mr Roberge well to look at what would have been the alternative before going out and about with his “outrage”.
Kalsone on
Just claim it was a War of 1812 reference when English soldiers and sailors and Quebec militia beat Benedixt Arnold and the US armies.
HonestCrow on
Meh. Wasn’t he born in the territories and raised in Alberta? I get it’s a gaff, but it’s pretty minor all things considered.
sabres_guy on
Carney’s more ridiculous detractors have been trying to attack him after this speech as they usually do, but even the CPC and Pierre threw in the towel on their usual rhetoric and gave credit where it was due. (days later, as usual)
I said it before. Carney nailed it and sometimes conservatives and detractors just need to know the value of just sitting something out instead of the usual political circus and rhetoric.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
10 Kommentare
“Pro-Quebec independence politicians pounced on the remarks, which arrived on the eve of a major Parti Québécois policy convention. About 1,400 people are expected.”
It sounds like these politicians are simply just blowing this out of proportion in an attempt to further push their own agenda. Like the pro-BREXIT politicians in Britain, these politicians will do anything for their own political gain. In the end, the only people that will suffer are regular people.
If Quebec leaves Canada, at best their economy will be in ruin, at worst they’ll be American within a year.
I think Carney has a huge blind-spot when it comes to Quebec. He needs a trusted advisor to help him navigate the dangerous waters of Quebec federal politics.
Mark Carney would have failed his Canadian History exam in Grade 10 with his comments on the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. He has a francophone Quebec Chief of Staff. Surely, he would be aware of what happened during the Battle.
It’s not a blind spot, it’s Quebec nationalists quoting selectively the whole thing.
As a Quebecer I’m sick and tired of these people speaking on my name.
Yes, optics don’t look good, carney was too nuanced and two things out of a long speech was selectively put out there.
Pequistes and crypto-Pequistes in the CAQ criticize Carney. Sovereignty was a boomer dream and I don’t see they’ll find the kind of saliency again that existed among people that, say, grew up in the 1960s or even can remember the times before.
If one actually listens to the speech, [or reads the transcript](https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/speeches/2026/01/22/building-canada-together-prime-minister-carney-delivers-remarks-citadelle), they’d understand that this is a hit piece with no basis in what he actually said or meant. Anyone who actually listens to or reads the speech knows this is just lies. Take anything out of the context it is said in and you can flip the meaning.
It is an interesting insight into his perspective on Canadian history, one in which he praises
>“the resilience of Francophones. A resilience sometimes quiet, often combative, but always determined to preserve a language, a culture, and an identity.“
and acknowledges a path of three peoples, English, French, and Indigenous, forced together by the results of that battle. It is very clear he is talking about that battlefield as a point where these peoples were brought together into Canada, not praising the battle itself or anything ridiculous like that as commenters here are suggesting.
He even goes further to acknowledge the horrors of that time, the deportation of the Acadians and the oppression faced by French people in Canada. He talks about the Durham report, something I see people specifically criticizing him for not doing in these comments. Read his words, not this strange and absurd bastardization of them.
Carney better soon learn how careful he must be when saying anything Québec! His statement was factually correct, despite the negative reaction.
Had the French won and held Nouvelle France, Quebec would in all likelihood end up much like Louisiana, sold by Napoleon to the Americans forty-four years later. Now look at how much french is left in Louisiana, street names and places perhaps, not much else. Almost no one born in Louisiana speaks french as a first language, the ones who do are living in borrowed time. A stark contrast with the very much alive Québécois culture of nowadays.
As horrible as the British rule may have been, the Québécois were allowed to keep their laws, their language and their way of life! That’s the accommodation Carney referred to.
In the history of colonial control, there’s usually not any good happening for the colonized. It would serve Mr Roberge well to look at what would have been the alternative before going out and about with his “outrage”.
Just claim it was a War of 1812 reference when English soldiers and sailors and Quebec militia beat Benedixt Arnold and the US armies.
Meh. Wasn’t he born in the territories and raised in Alberta? I get it’s a gaff, but it’s pretty minor all things considered.
Carney’s more ridiculous detractors have been trying to attack him after this speech as they usually do, but even the CPC and Pierre threw in the towel on their usual rhetoric and gave credit where it was due. (days later, as usual)
I said it before. Carney nailed it and sometimes conservatives and detractors just need to know the value of just sitting something out instead of the usual political circus and rhetoric.