Much has already been written about Quebec’s student protests. Some have elaborated on the arguments for and against raising student tuition while others have decided to emphasize the impact of the violence and lawlessness of certain protestors on our democratic system.
Allow me, however, to focus on two other realities that should be understood from this student uprising.
First is the fact that, tragically, a significant number of young Quebeckers clearly believe that change is achieved in the street and not at the ballot box. Despite the fact that an election in Quebec is likely only months away, students are not prepared to exercise the privileges afforded to them by democracy to enact change, even though the Parti Québécois is promising to cancel the Liberal government’s legislated tuition hikes.
Some state that this is because the protests have shifted from opposing the tuition hikes to demanding a fundamental change to our social contract and economic system — a change that requires not ballots but a societal uprising in order to be realized. Yet despite the ruminations of Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois — spokesperson of the more militant CLASSE group — it is not at all clear that the majority of protestors support these radical aims.
Indeed, there is a considerable menace to our democracy if an elected premier allows a mob to dictate public policy. Yet there is just as significant a menace over the long term if such a significant number of youth do not have faith in our democratic system. This problem is not limited to Quebec — only 37.4% of Canadians aged 18-24 cast a ballot in the 2008 federal election.
Electoral reform must be on the radar of governments across the land. Further, governments must make the effort to speak to their young constituents on the issues that matter to them and that will affect them. There must be a clear message emanating from elected representatives that attempts will be made to bridge the values-based and economic divides that exists between the Baby Boomers and the Millennials. For instance, the Charest government has failed to communicate coherently to students that the proposed tuition hikes will render the service of education sustainable for future generations.
Second, many find it odd — if not appalling — that students who pay the lowest tuition fees in North America have the gall to riot when the proposed increases will leave them with still the lowest tuition on the continent. In fact, such massive government subsidization of post-secondary education has left many students in Quebec with a sense of entitlement.
High taxes, massive debt and huge equalization transfers have turned Quebec into a paradise for certain government services and subsidies, from low tuition to $7-a-day daycare. Meanwhile, the rest of Canada has decided collectively that it will attempt to live within its means. Too many young Quebeckers — and this is the fault of policy makers in Quebec and the rest of Canada alike — are basically oblivious to the fact that a country exists outside Quebec’s borders.
The protestors want free tuition. These same leftist demonstrators want to shut down Alberta’s oil sands, thus destroying numerous manufacturing jobs in their own province and bringing to a grinding halt the very equalization payments that finance their education system. And of course, they don’t want to develop Quebec’s natural resources in the north either, citing environmental concerns. In other words, they aren’t aware that things actually cost money. They live in a world of their own.
Again, if you lose a major segment of an entire generation, there are significant repercussions over the long term. In this case, it’s a question of national unity.
Quebec’s youth could go one of two ways. One possibility is continuing to live in the fantasy world, which will lead to an increasingly large disconnect between Quebeckers and other Canadians. Other Canadians will grow tired of financing Quebec’s programs, whereas Quebeckers will grow increasingly oblivious to the world around them.
Or, Quebec can choose the path of deeper integration with a greater contribution to the rest of Canada, whether it is on a national energy strategy, health care reform, or economic development. Such a plan can only function over the long run if elected officials explain to Quebec’s youth that true independence runs through further integration with Canada and through economic reform and sustainability, whereas attempts by separatist politicians to create an alternative social model from the rest of Canada — or even to separate from the latter — have created an ironic situation in which Quebec is dependent upon other provinces.
True independence — particularly economic independence and growth — is what gives a people enough wealth to achieve justice, a core societal value that is particularly cherished by the province’s youth.
If Jean Charest is re-elected in the upcoming provincial vote, that will give Quebec a few years to continue a plan to achieve that very independence for Quebeckers — an independence that will in fact advance national unity over the long run. However, when Alison Redford’s term as Alberta premier is up and Danielle Smith gets another crack, everything is on the table. If the latter wins, the ensuing national battle over equalization may well tear the country apart.
At this point, the national unity battles of the future appear more likely to be economic than constitutional. The fight within Quebec over tuition hikes today is an indicator of how those future battles are likely to end.
Original Article
Source: iPolitics
Author: Zach Paikin
Allow me, however, to focus on two other realities that should be understood from this student uprising.
First is the fact that, tragically, a significant number of young Quebeckers clearly believe that change is achieved in the street and not at the ballot box. Despite the fact that an election in Quebec is likely only months away, students are not prepared to exercise the privileges afforded to them by democracy to enact change, even though the Parti Québécois is promising to cancel the Liberal government’s legislated tuition hikes.
Some state that this is because the protests have shifted from opposing the tuition hikes to demanding a fundamental change to our social contract and economic system — a change that requires not ballots but a societal uprising in order to be realized. Yet despite the ruminations of Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois — spokesperson of the more militant CLASSE group — it is not at all clear that the majority of protestors support these radical aims.
Indeed, there is a considerable menace to our democracy if an elected premier allows a mob to dictate public policy. Yet there is just as significant a menace over the long term if such a significant number of youth do not have faith in our democratic system. This problem is not limited to Quebec — only 37.4% of Canadians aged 18-24 cast a ballot in the 2008 federal election.
Electoral reform must be on the radar of governments across the land. Further, governments must make the effort to speak to their young constituents on the issues that matter to them and that will affect them. There must be a clear message emanating from elected representatives that attempts will be made to bridge the values-based and economic divides that exists between the Baby Boomers and the Millennials. For instance, the Charest government has failed to communicate coherently to students that the proposed tuition hikes will render the service of education sustainable for future generations.
Second, many find it odd — if not appalling — that students who pay the lowest tuition fees in North America have the gall to riot when the proposed increases will leave them with still the lowest tuition on the continent. In fact, such massive government subsidization of post-secondary education has left many students in Quebec with a sense of entitlement.
High taxes, massive debt and huge equalization transfers have turned Quebec into a paradise for certain government services and subsidies, from low tuition to $7-a-day daycare. Meanwhile, the rest of Canada has decided collectively that it will attempt to live within its means. Too many young Quebeckers — and this is the fault of policy makers in Quebec and the rest of Canada alike — are basically oblivious to the fact that a country exists outside Quebec’s borders.
The protestors want free tuition. These same leftist demonstrators want to shut down Alberta’s oil sands, thus destroying numerous manufacturing jobs in their own province and bringing to a grinding halt the very equalization payments that finance their education system. And of course, they don’t want to develop Quebec’s natural resources in the north either, citing environmental concerns. In other words, they aren’t aware that things actually cost money. They live in a world of their own.
Again, if you lose a major segment of an entire generation, there are significant repercussions over the long term. In this case, it’s a question of national unity.
Quebec’s youth could go one of two ways. One possibility is continuing to live in the fantasy world, which will lead to an increasingly large disconnect between Quebeckers and other Canadians. Other Canadians will grow tired of financing Quebec’s programs, whereas Quebeckers will grow increasingly oblivious to the world around them.
Or, Quebec can choose the path of deeper integration with a greater contribution to the rest of Canada, whether it is on a national energy strategy, health care reform, or economic development. Such a plan can only function over the long run if elected officials explain to Quebec’s youth that true independence runs through further integration with Canada and through economic reform and sustainability, whereas attempts by separatist politicians to create an alternative social model from the rest of Canada — or even to separate from the latter — have created an ironic situation in which Quebec is dependent upon other provinces.
True independence — particularly economic independence and growth — is what gives a people enough wealth to achieve justice, a core societal value that is particularly cherished by the province’s youth.
If Jean Charest is re-elected in the upcoming provincial vote, that will give Quebec a few years to continue a plan to achieve that very independence for Quebeckers — an independence that will in fact advance national unity over the long run. However, when Alison Redford’s term as Alberta premier is up and Danielle Smith gets another crack, everything is on the table. If the latter wins, the ensuing national battle over equalization may well tear the country apart.
At this point, the national unity battles of the future appear more likely to be economic than constitutional. The fight within Quebec over tuition hikes today is an indicator of how those future battles are likely to end.
Original Article
Source: iPolitics
Author: Zach Paikin
No comments:
Post a Comment