Quebec politics

Re: Trudeau’s Master Stroke, Conrad Black, March 31. I suppose bilingualism worked to stem the flow of blood from the patient, but like with all government inventions, it survives well past its best before date. And I’m not so sure it was the salve that Quebecers look to as proof of English Canada’s acceptance of their cultural distinctiveness. Rather, it established a pattern of temper tantrums, followed by candy, that has existed ever since. A nation held together with the proceeds of a shakedown is unified in name only.

Thanks to official bilingualism, the only way to get a cozy job with the federal bureaucracy in Ottawa is through nepotism or to speak French. This idiocy surely results in a less efficient civil service.

William Mathews, Newmarket, Ont. Usually I am in harmony with Conrad Black’s opinions, but on the question of “nations” and Quebec, I take issue with him. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a nation as “a large aggregate of people so closely associated with each other by factors such as common descent, language, culture, history and occupation of the same territory as to be identified as a distinct people.”

I submit that Quebec falls comfortably within this definition, albeit almost inescapably in any meaningful way as part of the multi-national, multicultural, multi-ethnic, bilingual state that is Canada.

William Pender, Salisbury, U.K. In an otherwise excellent article, Conrad Black somewhat misquotes comedian Yvan Deschamp’s observation on Quebec aspirations. I believe Mr. Deschamps actually said: “Le vrai Québécois sait qu’est-ce qu’y veut. Pis qu’est-ce qu’y veut, c’t’un Québec indépendant, dans un Canada fort” (The real Québécois knows what he’s after, and that’s an independent Quebec in a strong Canada”).

A perfect capture of the ambiguity and hilarity of past Quebec separatist politics.

Gus Pokotylo, Victoria.