# Canadian Dopers: Is it unacceptable to have the BQ allied with the government? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 3, 2008, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536 "2008-12-03T18:17:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/41 "2008-12-05T15:16:50Z")
**RickJay** , you might well be right that I’ve misinterpreted what people have been saying. People like **Uzi** and **Grey** haven’t clarified what ‘unacceptable’ means to them (which I asked above), and I might be assuming. I wouldn’t have said that you, or **Flying Dutchman** , or **Hap Shaughnessy** felt that way. I’ll try to look back through the threads today and see which posts I interpreted that way. You do have to admit, though, that absolutely no one has turned this back on Westerners and their right to have opinions. ---
**Author:** ![ThePylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@ThePylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThePylon)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/42 "2008-12-05T15:23:45Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Speaking as a guy in between (Ontario) there’s no doubt that this is the feeling Westerners get. The political sensibility that seems to be advocated by the media and everyone in the Ottawa Valley Um - just a nitpick, but, the ‘Valley is hardly a bastion of political correctness. Downtown Ottawa? Sort of? But the ‘Valley is home to the Carleton Landowners’ Association - which makes most of Western Canada seem like a bunch of granola crunchin’ latte sippers ;). ---
**Author:** ![ThePylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@ThePylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThePylon)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/43 "2008-12-05T15:28:26Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Look at your own post. **Nobody here has said Quebec representatives shouldn’t be able to participate in government.** You just made that up - I think you did it unconsciously, but there it is. You’re taking the positions of people who disagree with the BQ and twisting it into something it is not. People have written that they think it’s wrong for a government to sign a deal with a separatist party, but haven’t said it should be disallowed or made illegal. I think herein lies the rub - is the BQ a seperatist party? I think so, but I don’t believe most Quebeckers do - I think they’ve seen them as the best option to keep their interests up in parliament… and ignore their founding principles as a pipe dream. The principles offend me, but I’m not in their situation - maybe I’d like a centrist “Ontario Party” in Parliament… ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/44 "2008-12-05T15:34:31Z")
> [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](#): > > **RickJay** , you might well be right that I’ve misinterpreted what people have been saying. People like **Uzi** and **Grey** haven’t clarified what ‘unacceptable’ means to them (which I asked above), and I might be assuming. I wouldn’t have said that you, or **Flying Dutchman** , or **Hap Shaughnessy** felt that way. I’ll try to look back through the threads today and see which posts I interpreted that way. > > You do have to admit, though, that absolutely no one has turned this back on Westerners and their right to have opinions. > [@Grey](#): > > A governing coalition is exactly that - governing. I object strongly to any separatist party being a member of such a coalition. > > And to forestall any objections - I have no problem with them acting to defeat the government. I object to them becoming the government. > [@Grey](#): > > I hate this. While I know any party in the House can form the government it sticks deep in my craw that the Bloc can hold the reins in an executive capacity. I’m mad and not making much sense any more. I’ve also made poor jokes about gutting 308 politicians for getting us into this mess. I figured I should try harder to avoid these threads if that was going to be my contribution. But be very clear on this my objection to the Bloc is based solely on its key principle and has nothing to do with its members, supporter or the province it is based in. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/45 "2008-12-05T16:18:22Z")
> [@ThePylon](#): > > I think herein lies the rub - is the BQ a seperatist party? I think so, but I don’t believe most Quebeckers do - I think they’ve seen them as the best option to keep their interests up in parliament… and ignore their founding principles as a pipe dream. The principles offend me, but I’m not in their situation - maybe I’d like a centrist “Ontario Party” in Parliament… God no. 10 screaming little enclaves howling at each other and imagining all sorts of insults and rejections. I say we leave that job to the Premiers. ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/46 "2008-12-05T16:22:11Z")
Well, yes, **Grey** , but given those principles, do you believe it is unacceptable (as in, should not be allowed to happen) that the BQ support or form part of the government? ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/47 "2008-12-05T16:51:47Z")
> [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](#): > > Well, yes, **Grey** , but given those principles, do you believe it is unacceptable (as in, should not be allowed to happen) that the BQ support or form part of the government? Acceptable is the wrong word. I believe it is completely legal for the Bloc to help form the government of Canada. I believe it is completely illegitimate for the Bloc to help form the government of Canada. Those 2 thoughts can exist quite comfortably together. Legal doesn’t mean right. Now the Bloc is of course allowed to _support_ or oppose a government. To do otherwise would be to disenfranchise those Canadians that voted for them. But, and this is critical, this Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition can not exist unless their members act in unison. To act in unison they must be considered together and as such the Bloc becomes part of the government. The coalition can not work otherwise. The Liberals and NDP have only 114 votes to the Conservatives 143. Without the Bloc they have nothing. So to have the power they want they must bring the Bloc into government with them. To do that with a party born out of disengagement and soft nationalism is not something I can agree with. Beyond that I want you to consider how deeply offensive it is that this coalition formed suddenly not to vote the Conservatives out, but to take power themselves. Had they truly wanted to govern they should have presented their cobbled together coalition to the GG before the Throne Speech. Or even better, to the Canadian people while campaigning for 6 weeks. ---
**Author:** ![serious\_lark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@serious\_lark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/serious_lark)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/48 "2008-12-05T18:56:57Z")
Unacceptable was probably a poor word choice in the OP - sorry. I chose the word unacceptable in my original post after indicating that legality was not an issue because I wanted people to be able to say if they felt that, regardless of legality, they had concerns or issues about the BQ as part of the governing coalition rather than strictly on the opposition benches as they have been so far. (Yes, I am aware that the BQ has supported Conservative bills that would not have otherwise passed, but that had so far been on an ad hoc basis rather than formalized the way the proposed Coalition was doing.) The difference between legal and right, as **Grey** has said. Here in Calgary, many people seem to feel that it is wrong (no matter what the law says) that a party could be part of governing the country that it is supposedly trying to exit. For those of you opposed to the BQ formally supporting the proposed Coalition government, is there anything the BQ could promise or do (for the duration of the Coalition) that would ease your concerns? ---
**Author:** ![serious\_lark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@serious\_lark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/serious_lark)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/49 "2008-12-05T19:16:07Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > And yet, people who support the conservatives manage to pony up when the hat comes round. Why are other people so cheap when it comes to the parties they support? For myself, I can think of many causes I would rather donate my (admittedly limited budget of ) charity dollars to than to the bunch of yahoos trying to get elected, even if the tax credit is way better for political donations. You know, autism research, support my local cancer centre, my church, my son’s school … YMMV. If the alternative is wiping all the opposition parties off the map by financial starvation, it’s probably time for me to rethink that decision - although I think I’ll wait until the pseudocrisis is settled at the end of January 2009 before sending out any cheques, so that none of the opposition parties get the wrong idea. Here’s an article I found about how the Conservatives seem to be better than the Liberals at adapting to these donation rule changes, both lately and in the past: [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=85a3dead-0701-4e8c-9f78-957ec78b4ea6&p=1](http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=85a3dead-0701-4e8c-9f78-957ec78b4ea6&p=1) ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2008, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/50 "2008-12-05T19:18:13Z")
Formally renounce separation and plan to run candidates in ridings across the country. There’s eastern Ontario, Manitoba and New Brunswick they could initially expand into. ---
**Author:** ![lynxie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e99b99/32.png) [@lynxie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynxie)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/51 "2008-12-06T00:22:32Z")
> [@ThePylon](#): > > I think herein lies the rub - is the BQ a seperatist party? I think so, but I don’t believe most Quebeckers do - I think they’ve seen them as the best option to keep their interests up in parliament… and ignore their founding principles as a pipe dream. The principles offend me, but I’m not in their situation - maybe I’d like a centrist “Ontario Party” in Parliament… I was thinking this kind of thing. What if tthere was an “Ontario First” party? A party that put Ontario above every other region, ran on that platform and didn’t field candidates in any other province. It wouldn’t need any separatist leanings at all to be absolutely despised in TROC, deservedly so. I think the fact that The Bloc is so purely regional, and so openly, would hurt it in the eyes of TROC - with or without the separatism aspect. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/52 "2008-12-06T05:44:39Z")
> [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](#): > > **RickJay** , you might well be right that I’ve misinterpreted what people have been saying. People like **Uzi** and **Grey** haven’t clarified what ‘unacceptable’ means to them (which I asked above), and I might be assuming. I wouldn’t have said that you, or **Flying Dutchman** , or **Hap Shaughnessy** felt that way. I’ll try to look back through the threads today and see which posts I interpreted that way. Why should I clarify what is ‘unacceptable’? Would it be unacceptable to you if the ROC formed a party whose founding principals was to remove the ROC from Quebec? It should be obvious that any party sitting in parliament who would, if they could, break up the country shouldn’t be part of a coalition with other parties who claim to be for Canada. Yes, Quebecers have a right to vote for anyone they choose to and have those representatives in the HOC. I don’t have a problem with parties, who are now members of parliament, working together as individual to promote, or stop, legislation because that is their job. They should work together. So, as an individual member of the HOC, I don’t have a problem with any Bloc member. But on a party level, any party that claims to be for Canada shouldn’t be making long term deals with them. [QUOTE=serious lark] If the alternative is wiping all the opposition parties off the map by financial starvation, it’s probably time for me to rethink that decision [/QUOTE] I’m pretty sure that conservatives give to those charities you mention, too. > [@](#): > > Here’s an article I found about how the Conservatives seem to be better than the Liberals at adapting to these donation rule changes,… And yet the conservatives tend to be labeled as the tools of big business. Odd seeing how it is the Liberals who used to make the most money from them. If I can extrapolate based upon you link as to who is more in touch with the common Canadian, I’d have to say the party who actually goes out and asks them for their money directly. Which might explain a lot about the miscalculation the Niberals made over how Canadians are reacting to their coalition. ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/53 "2008-12-06T08:05:53Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Speaking as a guy in between (Ontario) there’s no doubt that this is the feeling Westerners get. The political sensibility that seems to be advocated by the media and everyone in the Ottawa Valley is that you’re not allowed to say anything that could conceivably be construed as criticism of Quebec, even if it has to be twisted around quite a lot to claim it is. Such things are “provocations” or “insults” or “bigotry.” Oh yeah, because it’s Quebec media that enjoys saying English Canadians are inherently xenophobic and even racist, and that English Canada is basically a “sick society”. Every time an English Canadian politician talks about Canadian culture, it’s pointed out how afraid English Canadians are of anything that comes from outside of their little bubble and doesn’t speak their language. Give me a break. Your media are very often pointing out real or perceived flaws with Quebec society. And it seems to me they don’t even do it in order to allow Quebec to improve, but rather to make English Canadians feel superior. Maybe you just don’t notice it because these “flaws” have become truisms to you? > [@](#): > > But suggest that we shouldn’t give big time handouts to automakers in Ontario and Quebec and all hell breaks loose. It’s a provocation! The automobile industry is mostly present in Ontario. Quebec has the aerospace industry. > [@](#): > > Indeed, two nights ago on CBC - our national broadcaster, paid for with my tax dollars - a CBC commentator as much as said that Stephen Harper was Hitler, saying that proroguation was equivalent to the Nazis burning the Reichstag. If someone said Gilles Duceppe was Jefferson Davis there’d be a shitstorm the likes of which you’d never seen. Lucien Bouchard was compared to Hitler, maybe worse. I forget if this was when he was Bloc leader or Quebec premier. So was Jacques Parizeau. This said, your comment has made me think of something. The night in 1981 when the federal government signed a constitutional deal with nine provinces, with the exception of Quebec, that led to the patriation of the Constitution, is often known in Quebec as the “Night of the Long Knifes”. This is a Nazi reference and it could be seen as offensive. But I think that not too many people in Quebec would make the link, and if it was actually suggested that Chrétien and Trudeau’s maneuver was in any actual way comparable to the suppression of the SA, it would be seen as a gross exageration. I think the name was chosen as some sort of black humour. ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/54 "2008-12-06T08:19:48Z")
> [@Grey](#): > > Formally renounce separation and plan to run candidates in ridings across the country. There’s eastern Ontario, Manitoba and New Brunswick they could initially expand into. Completely, utterly wrong. This is the Bloc québécois, not the [Bloc populaire canadien](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloc_populaire). You’re conflating Quebec with Ye Olde French-Canadian Race, which hasn’t been true for decades. The Bloc is there to defend the interests of the Quebec nation, which includes **matt\_mcl** and even **Barbarian** but doesn’t include my Franco-Ontarian friend (who, rest assured, I like very much). Why would these minority francophones vote for the Bloc anyway? They’re usually voting for the Liberals because they feel an active and pro-bilingualism federal government is a good bet to defend their linguistic rights. A provincialist party like the Bloc won’t do anything to defend these rights. ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/55 "2008-12-06T08:25:33Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Why should I clarify what is ‘unacceptable’? Would it be unacceptable to you if the ROC formed a party whose founding principals was to remove the ROC from Quebec? Ha, I’d like to see this. (Most likely they’d campaign to expel Quebec from Canada, actually; I’ve seen some bloggers expressing this viewpoint. Of course, I don’t believe Quebec can be expelled from Canada unless the National Assembly of Quebec consents, which, if we ever get to this point, should be feasible.) We’d be able to see how popular this idea actually is. Yes, it would certainly be acceptable. If this party ever comes to the point of being part of a federal coalition government (which, you’ll notice, isn’t what the Bloc is doing, and once again, it’s questionable how “separatist” the Bloc is), I’m not sure what purpose they could serve on this government, but I’d be willing to see. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/56 "2008-12-06T12:12:59Z")
> [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](#): > > Completely, utterly wrong. This is the Bloc québécois, not the [Bloc populaire canadien](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloc_populaire). You’re conflating Quebec with Ye Olde French-Canadian Race, which hasn’t been true for decades. The Bloc is there to defend the interests of the Quebec nation, which includes **matt\_mcl** and even **Barbarian** but doesn’t include my Franco-Ontarian friend (who, rest assured, I like very much). Why would these minority francophones vote for the Bloc anyway? They’re usually voting for the Liberals because they feel an active and pro-bilingualism federal government is a good bet to defend their linguistic rights. A provincialist party like the Bloc won’t do anything to defend these rights. I’m not wrong - I was asked what they could do to make me “approve of them”. I like my federal parties to be federal. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/57 "2008-12-06T14:32:14Z")
> [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](#): > > Oh yeah, because it’s Quebec media that enjoys saying English Canadians are inherently xenophobic and even racist, and that English Canada is basically a “sick society”. Ooookay… now, inherent xenophobia is one I’ve heard about Quebec, I admit, but “sick society”? That’s a new one. I don’t even get the phrase. A society full of people with the flu? And I wasn’t talking about a difference between English Canada and Quebec. I’m specifically referring to the way Western Canada is approached. If you don’t want to believe the West gets shafted, you’re welcome to dismiss whatever you want. Feel free not to listen. > [@](#): > > Give me a break. Your media are very often pointing out real or perceived flaws with Quebec society. And it seems to me they don’t even do it in order to allow Quebec to improve, but rather to make English Canadians feel superior. Maybe you just don’t notice it because these “flaws” have become truisms to you? I don’t even know what “sick society” is supposed to mean, so I guess not. Why are you making this personal? Look at yoiur answer to Grey; he was asked what the BQ would have to do to make him support a govenrment with them, he said so, and you said he was wrong and started going off about how the BQ doesn’t work for francophones outside Quebec, which has absolutely nothing to do with his statement. How can he be wrong about his own opinion? And are you denying the BQ supports separation? If you think that, you might want to read their platform. I think it’s reasonable for someone who values a united Canada to say that they are opposed to the BQ because of their support for separatism and say “I would like them more if they dropped that plank in ttheir platform.” What’s wrong with that? ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/58 "2008-12-06T15:50:34Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Look at yoiur answer to Grey; he was asked what the BQ would have to do to make him support a govenrment with them, he said so, and you said he was wrong and started going off about how the BQ doesn’t work for francophones outside Quebec, which has absolutely nothing to do with his statement. How can he be wrong about his own opinion? The second statement of the quoted material was not an opinion, and it betrayed a misconception of what the BQ is and is for. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/59 "2008-12-06T16:08:43Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > The second statement of the quoted material was not an opinion, and it betrayed a misconception of what the BQ is and is for. No it doesn’t. It lays out what they would have to do for me to accept them. Does it entail a broadening of their focus? Damn right. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2008, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536/60 "2008-12-06T17:28:46Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > The second statement of the quoted material was not an opinion, and it betrayed a misconception of what the BQ is and is for. Bull. It betrayed nothing of the sort. Here’s the quote: > [@](#): > > Formally renounce separation and plan to run candidates in ridings across the country. There’s eastern Ontario, Manitoba and New Brunswick they could initially expand into. These are **Grey** ’s opinions as to what would cause him to respect the Bloc more. Are they REALISTIC outcomes? No, they’re not, _but it’s an honest response_. If you think Grey doesn’t understand what the BQ is for, boy, did you ever just get whooshed. I’m sure you’d like the Conservative Party is they abandoned conservatism, embraced policies similar to the NDP, and named a notable former NDP leader as their party leader. Realistic? No, but it’d make you consider voting for them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canadian-dopers-is-it-unacceptable-to-have-the-bq-allied-with-the-government/475536.md?page=4)