This is trivial.

Why not discuss reasonable accommodation for the First Nations?

Your track record with that is very poor.

Well, it is happening so it can't be summarily dismissed no matter how hard we dream.

That said, yes it is a fair debate to include First Nations but the point of this commission is deal with new immigrants. A different cat altogether.

French-Canadians speak of Quebec as if the territorial boundaries begin and end with them. There's a debate that it doesn't and the Cree have made this clear in the event of separation.

While First Nations and their place in Canada remains somewhat abysmal, I think the government and increasingly the population want better conditions for everyone involved. However, on the flip side First Nations leaders are also filled with corruption that have prevented them from doing what's right and giving good advice for their people.

Plenty of blame to go around on this one.

Look, a healthy dose of reality is needed here. Quebec's population is 80% French-speaking. That's hardly trivial.

"However, on the flip side First Nations leaders are also filled with corruption that have prevented them from doing what's right and giving good advice for their people."

What kind of corruption are you talking about (it can't be fiscal) and what good advice?

Here are some myth-busting figures from the Dept' of Indian Affairs.

"While there are certainly issues that arise with regard to how some money is handled, these are no more significant among First Nations than in any comparable community...The perception that corruption is acute among First Nations is especially irritating given that First Nations provide an extremely high degree of accountability for the use of their funds."

"...according to DIAND figures, the "problems" in communities are very few. Among the 557 audits conducted by DIAND of First Nations financial management in 2002-03, auditors found only 16 cases (less than 3%) where it was necessary to register an adverse opinion or denial of the band council's financial statement. The reasons for some of these opinions are as simple as a lack of adequate documentation for some transactions or a departure from generally approved accounting procedures. One of the ways that DIAND deals with areas of difficulty, either due to financial, political or other challenges faced by band councils is the appointment of a third party manager to assist the First Nation in addressing their issues. As of March 31, 2004, there were third party managers working with 34 of the 633 band councils (5%)."

Thanks for this Lapdog.

Look, I was responding to Moonraven who made a fair point. Yeesh, I know.

I went to a private college where Mohawks attended also. We hung out, played hockey and talked. I know what went on. They told us the stories. One guy told me, and this ties into "advice" that community leaders were busy trying to get the government to rid them of social issues because the prevailing attitude was the white man destroyed their lives.

Well, that turned out to be a poor plan as it made them more dependent. In recent times, empowerment and the need to integrate while maintaining identity has become far more important - and healthy. Politically, the Federal government is slowly recognizing this as First Nations now control Nunavut. All this is positive. Whether it succeeds or goes further (for example, representation in Parliament) I don't know.

The usual political and social corruptions took place within the ranks. Nothing extraordinary. Besides, doesn't anyone watch North of 60?

This is all I'm going to say on the matter.

The point of this piece is Bouchard-Taylor and not First Nations.

So yes, by the way, mine is a personal experience and from what I've read through the years.

"This is all I'm going to say on the matter."

Praise the Lord!

Ethnocentric nationalism in Quebec has always been a funny story. In Chineese, there is a proverb that says "Be careful what you wish for, you might as well get it." However, sometimes, it's just the opposite that comes up.

In the recent stories about the Bouchard-Taylor commission, it is exactly that. The most recent baby in terms of commissions of Jean Charest, the antithesis of a prime minister just like Robert Bourassa used to be, in between two seats all the time, unsure, undecisive and just like Stéphane Dion who has no leadership whatsoever even when we try to find just a little as hard as we can, has become a little monster in the eye of the ROC (rest of Canada) and also in international press.

Of course, smelling the burning soup and smelling the huge mistake, Jean Charest does what he can do best which is: blame your mistakes on someone else, perhaps one of the only talent Jean Charest has as a prime minister. The question is whether or not people will be buying this worm but that's a complete other story.

In the case of Québec, we have only ourselves to blame in this topic. Nowaday, ethnocentric nationalists are starting to wonder why we don't attract successful European people, Frenchmen, Swissmen, Germans, Sweedish, etc people instead of always attracting people coming from corrupt countries dominated by despot dictators who will end up exploiting our welfare system and go in Ontario as soon as the opportunity comes up.

The answer is simple, in their so-called clever answer to denatality problems in which baby boomers only have themselves to blame and their socialists sacred cows (so-called free healthcare, free education and welfare for everyone, the poors and even so-called successful businesses like Bombardier and Alcan who would be long ago bankrupt in one case and gone in China in the other if government wasn't financing their activities), ethnocentric nationalists thought they should attract French immigration.

Despite wanting to attract Frenchmen from France who'd rather stay in their own socialist nightmare instead of jumping into another one, what they got was more people coming from their colonies.

Now, here we are several years later knocking our heads down wondering what just happened.

By choosing French immigration at all cost over competence, we as Quebeckers only get what we sincerly deserve. By being so anti-anglo in our bias (for example, we'd rather have hispanic immigration over English immigration, English won't come anyways), ethnocentric nationalists are shooting themselves in the foot several times as if in their masochistic ways, they liked it more than ever. Some are starting to regret that and start to wonder if we should have favorized competent labor instead. Nonetheless, despite all their cries and wonder at the Bouchard-Taylor commission, it's probably to late to undo the damage done. If they want to find the guilty party as they always like to do what they should do is just try to find a mirror and have a good hard look into it to find it.

Yes Tym Machine, this angle you posit is one we "ethnics" or "anglos" certainly noticed. Whether it was by design - and it does look that way - will only serve against the interests of Quebec. A mature society would not have opted for this.

Luckily most Quebecers are not falling into the xenophobic rhetoric of spent entities like Pierre Felardeau and other FLQ rejects.

Laugh but I'll use the Montreal Canadiens as an example. Nationalists demand that the captain and coach of this great team be bilingual. As such, the team only hires candidates that meet this criteria thus diminishing the potential of attracting and hiring the best possible person for the job.

On the other hand, the average Habs fan - of any language or culture- simply want the what is best for the team.

The notion that a hockey player must speak the language of the community is somewhat unfortunate. On one side, there is no doubt the captain of the Habs should learn to speak "quelque mots en francais." On the other, he should not be shamed into doing this. It turns out Koivu was taking lessons but was not comfortable with it in public.

So looks worse? Self- serving nationalists (hello Guy Bertrand and Pauline Marois) who went on a witch hunt after him or a hockey player who has done much for the community?

Quebec is in a tight spot but we sometimes make it worse for ourselves. Nationalism is effective in the short term for a culture but devastating in the long run.

One last thing: we have to shed our dependence on "le gouvernement" to solve all our problems. This province is one big inefficient welfare state.