Talk:1995 Quebec referendum/Archive 1

2768:

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL rder town* had their country split in two right down the middle of a city where half the place works on one side, and the other half on the other. Hard as it might have been for separatists to believe, the separation of Quebec in 1995 would have had a *very deep emotional effect* on the *entire country*. This sort of thing *motivates people*, (and companies are made up of people, and when almost everyone in a company feels the same way, it tends to leak into policy) and, motivated, they take action. Usually, that kind of thing motivates people to get together somewhere and tell other people what they think, because trust me, the referendum hit the whole damn country right in the heart. In this case, we were saying: "Please don't leave Canada." Yes. They were Federalists, and yes, they wanted you to vote no, and yes, it was political, and yes, the ticket discounts were politically motivated. Personally, I love Quebec so much I moved here. Would I vote for separation in the next referendum? Hell no. If there was a rally, would I call all my friends and attend? Yes. If I owned an airline and all my employees wanted to offer free tickets to it, would I agree? Hell yes. Call it partisan? It is. That being the case, I hardly see why it's relevant to point out that the attendees benefitted from cheap tickets. Perhaps some context would be good. At the moment, it looks a bit like sour grapes.

2732:

it, and while I'm aware that that's a typical fallacy (thinking your circle represent the whole,) given the political polarization of the country at the time, I'd have been amazed if, even if the rally hadn't been 'organized' (I've been to plenty of rallies that had *no* organizers at all) it hadn't just happened anyway. It's hard to imagine, under those circumstances, how a provincial law against political expression (ludicrous, insulting, patronizing, and totally illegal as such a law would have to be) might have been enforced against people from outside the province. What were they going to do, stop us at the borders? Arrest us? Absurd. The law and the spirit behind it, as well as the assumption that any organizational effort *wouldn't* have simply sprung up without the involvement of Option Canada. After all, Clearchannel has repeatedly learned what happens when you try to organize rallies that there is no support for. *Nobody comes*. It's as simple as that. You sure as hell don't get 10,000 people (though coming from someone who was there, that number does seem awfully low. A stadium can seat as many as 20,000, and there were certainly many more people there than in a packed stadium. I can't fault the Yes side for wanting to lowball the figure though.)

2386:

the 1995 referendum in a manner that was against Quebec law in principle and in practice. It would have been pretty easy for the organizers to do what they did against the principle of equal chance to both sides yet technically not against the law just by making sure they do everything from an address outside Quebec (since Quebec law can only be applied on the territory of Quebec). That was not very smart. However, the Supreme Court ruling landing just while the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec is suing a bunch of liberal friends, that was smart and oh so convenient. You can read this unfortunately not very balanced 1997 article from the Ottawa citizen to see for yourself how touchy the subject is

2296:"The forms of expression provided for in that section are so restrictive that they come close to being a total ban. There are alternative solutions consistent with the Act’s objective that are far better than the exceptions set out in s. 404. An exception to regulated expenses permitting citizens, either individually or in groups, to spend a certain amount on an entirely discretionary basis while prohibiting the pooling of such amounts would be far less intrusive than the s. 404 exceptions." 157:$ 2 million followed nine days later, on Oct. 2, and the final $ 1.8 million - to cover outstanding bills - was sent Dec. 20, 1995. Although organizers claim Option Canada used the money to extol the merits of federalism, the organization kept such a low profile that its name doesn't appear a single time in the library data-banks of La Presse, Le Devoir, Le Soleil or The Gazette. The $ 4.8-million grant to Option Canada is recorded in the Public Accounts of Canada. " 3388:. I've always respected him for being so passionate and devoted to his cause, but that's a bit much. It's as if he was looking to provoke the rest of Canada by just declaring what Quebec is going to take from the country's assets if it leaves. But as he's said before, "Canada is not a real country" anyway. Can't imagine "partnership" talks with this guy. Either way, Bouchard seems to have a knack for handling delicate issues like this with a blunt instrument. -- 31: 2638:, they wrote (my translation): "Let us note that Claude Arpin, of the daily newspaper The Gazette, discovered, after consulting the official report of the Comité pour le NON, that the Parti libéral du Québec, which directed the committee, made no less than 65 long distance calls (telephone and fax) from its office in Quebec City to the office of Option Canada during the month of the referendum. That is to say, more than two calls per day." 2068:- a mistaken view held by many sovereignists, such as Mathieugp, who apparently wrote this whole article and is helping to maintain its bias. The unity rally was a show of patriotism by Canadians in Montreal, legallly outside of the referendum. The Non campaign had nothing to do with the unity rally. This line is blatently biased and simply untrue. It should be edited, or simply removed. -- 3124:, I took sometime to update the article, mainly the section discussing the Unity Rally. It's a relatively brief edit in light of the information now available, so if anyone cares to do a more indepth update given Grenier's findings and how they effect the subject, please do. I also did some rephrasing and rewording of this section of the article to clarify some things and improve flow. 1944:

understand what happened, but we can write a full article on the court cases, the evidence presented, the analyses of the judges and all that. I don't understand why only two people are referred to in the ruling when about 29 people were prosecuted. I don't understand why a lot of the people who should have been interrogated were not. I am not a lawyer, so it might be normal. --

2835:

get the ballot is: "what agreement was that? You want me to read *that*??" Shouldn't they simply be sitting down and answering the damned question? Wouldn't it be simpler to *ask the one they're answering*, since they didn't come there to ratify an agreement, or put their stamp of approval on a document they have never even heard of and are never going to read?

2796:

Lisée, adviser to Jacques Parizeau and Lucien Bouchard has stated on TV that the question was drafted by himself taking as a basis the 1992 question on the Charlottetown Accord. Indeed, the 1992 question asked the citizens if they agreed on a constitutional reform on the basis of an agreement previously signed just before the referendum. Here is the question:

2117:) that organized the rally, then why does the article still read "The No-side committee organised a rally in Montreal for October 27"? Legally, the Unity Rally was above and outside of the Non campaign - the Non campaign was not responsible for the costs associated with it. Therefore it is not "a case of referendum fraud", as the article insinuates. -- 3154:

the behalf of the No side by supporters of Quebec sovereignty. Environment Minister Sergio Marchi told reporters "Mr. Gervais, on behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada, should wear like a badge of honor," and "I think it's a crock and they should stop nickelling and diming Canadians' sense of patriotism to death."

3253:

cleaned. Once again, some are trying to make us believe that soldiers acted without orders like during the sponsorship scandal. I am much in favour of the principle saying "considered innocent until proved guilty", but sometimes I wish it would be "considered guilty until proved innocent" for elected officials. ;-)

2930:

We seem to be going in circles. You say the article has a separatist POV. I ask for details, and you ask me to read it. I read it and ask again for details. You respond that it has a separatist point of view. What's separatist about it? (And please don't ask me to read it again or reply that it

2834:

That's the nature of the beast, and there's no escaping it. If the question is clarity, then make it clear; you're not asking a poli-sci class, you're asking a body of (largely) disinterested people who are generally disengaged from the political process. The question they're going to ask when they

2828:

That said, polling is a dangerous game, and referenda in general have a nasty way of being just as forked up. People who don't know the terms of reference respond based on their own internal ones. If I ask fifty people if they think I should stop beating my wife, for example, nearly all of them are

2731:

This is an interesting debate. I'm a Quebec resident, but at the time of the rally, I lived in Ontario. I went to the rally, along with almost everyone I knew at the time. In fact, my recollection of that period in time is that there were very few people I personally knew who did not fully support

156:

Using a name identical to a political party that died in 1992, Option Canada was incorporated on Sept. 7, 1995, government documents show. Seventeen days later, the first $ 1 million of its funding arrived from Ottawa and was quickly pumped into the campaign, say participants in the exercise. Another

2633:

Arpin found that "there are 65 telephone and fax calls to Option Canada on long-distance telephone bills from Liberal Party offices in Quebec City" and this is made him state that "the corporation was a player in the campaign". It is also the conclusion reached by Norman Lester and Robin Philpot. In

2274:

That is innacurate. The ruling Supreme Court ruling came in October 1997, 2 years after the referendum. It was clearly illegal under the law which was then enforced on the territory of Quebec. The Supreme Court, unlike the other courts, found that the limits to third-party expenses was too much. The

2222:

Yes, I agree. It is not entirely correct and is misleading indeed. I wrote the Unity Rally section on July 9, 2005 according to the article's history. I was relying on press material solely then (not a good idea in general). I think maybe the Quebec Business Council refers to the Conseil du patronat

2083:

1) The No committee was never informed nor involved in the organization and its leaders were only put before the fact at the last minute. The participation of No committee leaders and volunteers was forced upon them. If they had not participated, then the event would have been clearly illegal as the

219:

Can someone please edit this who has proper english. we in quebec do not:) I made a graph of the percentage of rejected balots in each riding, versus the percent of 'no' votes counted in each riding, to draw a (statistically) significant correlation. The significance was the result of a few ridings

125:

I also modified the comment about the Electoral inquiry to state: "Quebec's Chief Electoral Officer consequently had to interrupt the conduct of his inquiry and drop the charges." This situation needs clarification as I understood all charges had to be dropped and the illegal inquiry was shut down.

3366:

There doesn't have to be any particular rationale. When countries break up the appropriate thing to do is to split the assets and the debt roughly according to population. If Quebecers' taxes paid for a quarter of the fighter jets, they should get a quarter of the fighter jets. Things don't just go

3176:

For the sake of keeping this article concise and organized, and given the amount of information available, I think all this section should be summarized here, and given it's own, separate article, as has been previously suggested. I would nominate someone who knows a lot about the subject to do so.

3153:

Aurele Gervais, communications director for the Liberal Party of Canada, as well as the students' association at Ottawa's Algonquin College, were charged after the referendum for illegally hiring buses to bring supporters to Montreal for the rally, part of a larger accusation of illegal spending on

3020:

to be honest, I don't have the time to go through and analyze the article in great detail. However, it is in my opinion that this particular section of the article is given a once over by someone with no vested interest on the subject. I'll admit that I'm a highly dedicated federalist, which may be

2171:

to interrupt the conduct of his inquiry and drop the 20 criminal charges of illegal expenditures he had filed. I guess we could write that in the article, just to be on the safe side with facts. That is until I get my book back so I can refresh my memory with the details of how the No committee was

241:

Here's the raw data of the '95 referendum result, also published in The Ottawa Citizen page A4, Wednesday Nov 1, 1995. It is a bit unwieldy for the article (which needs cleanup, I agree) itself, but it does illustrate the basis of controversy around electoral fraud. A graph may be appropriate, if

152:

The Heritage Canada subsidy was awarded to Option Canada, a Montreal lobby group set up eight weeks before the Oct. 30 referendum vote. How the lobby group spent Ottawa's money - along with an undisclosed amount from anonymous sources - remains a closely guarded secret, nearly 1 1/2 years after the

3262:

The half a million figure stated by the media is only what Grenier could effortlessly prove to have been fraud. The rest of the millions cannot be, according to him, proved to have been spent illegally during the 1995 referendum campaign. Would an impartial and public investigation end up with the

3161:

If anybody feels my edits need adjusting, feel free to do so. I did my best to keep it objective (I know this is a controversial subject). I'm open to hearing suggestions on how to improve the article with that in mind. I'm still a bit of a n00b, so if I've offended anyone at all, I most sincerely

2840:

Now I understand that there's a lot more at play here, but the fact is, the question was unclear in a way that referendum questions are often unclear. It's endemic in referenda. That's the complaint: why wasn't it the one that was answered, stated plainly? The answer to that question is that it

2385:

I agree the phrasing can be changed to reflect the complex nature of the events, but to remain neutral we will have to expand more than that. The Libman case goes back to the 1992 referendum on the Charlottetown Accord. The Referendum Act goes back to before 1980. The Unity Rally was organized for

2250:

states "the limits imposed under s. 404 . . . come close to being a total ban" of political expression, a Charter right, which, as you say, invalidated parts of the Referendum Act. Legally, the ruling meant that the Referendum Act itself was in violation in the charter - therefore, the Unity Rally

3038:

Tagged for review in regards to the neutrality of this article. Does a section on the sponsorship scandal really belong here? Do we need to know that there's a law in Quebec which prohibits spending more than X dollars on a campaign, but that the federal government spent "30 million" ? Provincial

2822:

Unfortunately, that's not what the question *said*. That's pretty simple, and, I would think, obvious to even the meanest understanding. People (everywhere) have a tendency to obfuscate and cloud discussion. They don't have to be Sovereigntists or Federalists; they just want you to see it from

2353:

to be in violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. While we can speculate about whether or not it would have been illegal if s. 404 had been reformed before the fact, the law itself was struck down. Therefore, legally, you can not say that the Unity Rally was illegal - except to say it was

2795:

For many years now, the Liberals in Ottawa have been saying that the 1995 question was unclear. This assertion has been repeated so often now that a lot of people have started to think it has become a fact, despite much evidence to the contrary. One of the main evidence being that, Jean-François

2046:

That information can be found in a good number of articles in French, but in English the coverage was very different. I will keep looking into it. The estimate is that of the DGEQ I believe. I guess I will have to do some translation so the facts brought up by Francophone journalists be known to

1980:

Hmmm... not all of the edits are biased, and some corrected some POV in the article. Overall, however, these edits are clearly intended to impose Bcameron's federalist point of view on the article, and are very problematic. I would support a wholesale reversion. Some of Bcameron's edits could be

3211:

I removed some of the more flowery language to keep it concise and clear, particularly in the "Background" section. If anyone objects to my edits I'd be happy to discuss them. My focus is to simply keep it infomative and to the point for readers generally not in the known about the politics of

2134:

Because the "Quebec Business Council" and the No committee did not ignore each other's actions during the campaign. There is evidence of this. To claim such as thing is to take people for fools. If I remember correctly, the No committee furnished microphones and other kinds of equipment for the

3058:

I agree that the section "Disputes over the conduct of the referendum" has become very long. The solution is to move it to its own article, where it can be expanded further. It needs to include more annotations to support the many controversial statements it contains. It is certainly worthy of

2954:

Maybe we ought to insert more inline sources in "Disputes over the conduct of the referendum". I wrote most of it and the reason I put all the sources at the bottom of the article (in Further information and External links) is that most are in French and useless to the average English-speaking

2483:

Sure, we can make it into a full article. I think that more than 10 years after, there is enough solid material to write a full article on the subject. At the same time, there remains a lot of unanswered questions and we can see that lots of speculation made it into the press (in both official

236:

Scrutineers were appointed by the provincial governement (the ruling PQ), which was not a neutral player in the referendum. Residual trend means after excluding the statistical outlier ridings, there is a less striking but persistent association. This would suggest non-randomness, at least.

3252:

I haven't had a chance to really dig through the report itself, however I read what the media told us was important about it. Much disinformation as usual. First, Grenier ran a private investigation instead of a public one like people demanded. Coincidence: all the people holding offices were

2198:

organize the rally, which is exactly what the article claims. The Unity Rally was organized outside of the Non campaign. You admit the Non side may have known about it, but they did not do the brunt of the organizing, correct? If so, this sentence should be edited to reflect this, instead of

1943:

had something to do with the Unity Rally in Montreal. The book shows it was not the case. So this means there is even more money that was spent in violation of Quebec's law on spendings during referendums. Regarding the valid ballots being rejected, there are numerous facts we are missing to

87:, originally destined for the promotion of Canada's official languages, was awarded to Option Canada prior to the referendum. This information is available in the records of the Public Accounts of Canada. This information is however nowhere to be found in the CCU's annual report for 1995." 2517:

and the Supreme Court's ruling should be added to this section of the article, to make the legal implications of the Unity Rally a little more clear, rather than what's currently in the article: "This, according to Quebec law, is a case of referendum fraud", which is rather general, and

224:

Interesting... What do you call a "residual trend"? I saw the figures for the ridings with a higher percentage of rejection, but if I remember correctly, it never went beyond 5% of the total number of votes in the riding. Is this what you call "extraordinarily high rejection rates"? --

2767:

It also seems odd to see this: "A massive rally was held in downtown Montreal where Canadians, who had benefited from up to 90% discounts on train and plane tickets from federal public institutions, came to express their support for a 'no' vote." Because, besides the fact

3191:

I spend a good amount time rewording/rephrasing/negotiating the content of the first half of the article (i.e. everything up to and including "The Result" section). I did my best to keep the edits NPOV, and not alter the subject matter of what was there too extensively. \

3238:

Update: I lied. I've gone through it, rephrasing awkward sentences most likely directly translated from French. As well, I've been trying to keep the article up to date with the Grenier report, adding bits and pieces of information throughout the second half as needed.

220:

with extraordinarily high rejection rates but there was a residual trend. The graph is about 10 years old - if I can find it again, I will post it to the article. The source of the data was the results published in the Globe and Mail after the referendum. bcameron54

2193:

Being aware of a rally being organized and actually doing the organizing are different things. What I am telling you is that the article states "The No-side committee organised a rally in Montreal for October 27", which is misleading. My point is that the Non side did

204:

legal evidence). The only things that went to court had 1) the scrutineers judged not guilty, 2) many Bishop students found guilty and fined. As for the big inquiry of the DGEQ, we will never know because it was shut down by the Supreme Court before it was over. --

2665:

Only a serious public inquiry by Quebec's Chief Electoral Officer would have allowed us to know the full truth. And the Chief Electoral Officer was prevented from doing this when, on Oct. 17, 1997, the Supreme Court rendered its ruling on the Libman v. Quebec

2841:

wasn't because a: it couldn't be because it had to be pinned to something, and b: because the people who wrote it wanted people to vote a certain way. It's always like that, so the complaint is perhaps irrelevant, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate it.

174:

The DGEQ had to drop his inquiry, that I am sure of. I do not yet know who is behind the court case against the DGEQ's inquiry. Regarding the charges, I think it is in one of the annual reports of the DGEQ. I will find the quotes and translate them. --

2802:

The Charlottetown Accord is objectively more difficult to read for the average citizen than the June 12 agreement. Oddly enough, the clarity of the 1992 question was never questionned by federalists. Maybe because it was written by federalists?

2449:

On that note, perhaps an article focusing on just the Unity Rally itself would be a good idea? That way the controversy surrounding the Unity Rally could be explained in much greater detail than simply in a few sentences. What do you think?

2275:

ruling suggests the Referendum Act could for exemple attain its objective (to give an equal chance to both sides by regulating expenses) by allowing third parties to finance activities up to a certain amount. On Section 404, the judges said:

2148:

You are mistaken on what makes the thing a case of referendum fraud. If, as you say, the rally had been organized above and outside the No campaign, then it would definitely have been a case of referendum fraud as section 404 of the Quebec

2806:

It should also be pointed out that the referendums on the Maastricht Treaty and more recently the European Constitution also followed the logic of "We, the politicians have agreed on A, do you the sovereign people approve us or not?". --

2317:

If the Supreme Court's suggestion had been written into law in 1995, the organizing of the Unity Rally would still have been illegal. That is beside the point however since what matters is the law that was actually being enforced at the

3367:

to the biggest piece of the country left. Of course there are other federal assets like airports, bridges, etc., which can't be moved, and those things would have to be accounted for by adjusting Quebec's share of the debt up or down.

199:

What legal evidence are you referring to? What do you call "legal evidence" exactly? Since there has been no court cases on many of these issues, I don't see how there could be much legal evidence in one way or another (for sure, not

3059:

mention that the federal state broke its own federal laws by channelling taxpayers' money meant for francophone minorities to private groups which, by operating from within Quebec's territory, broken provincial referendum law. --

2963:. While reading it, I hilighted all the sentences which included dates and money figures with the intention of compiling it all in one comprehensive Timeline. I find this form to be the better one, especially in an Encyclopedia. 2063:

No, the no-side did not organize the unity rally. This debate has already been settled by the courts. Phil O'Brian, a Quebec business leader - later joined by Brian Tobin, a federal cabinet minister - organized the Unity Rally.

2996:

case. Maybe we will be able to know exactly how the federal government subsides meant for the French-speaking minorities of Canada ended up being spent on advertizing, airplane tickets etc. during the referendum campain. --

2060:"The No-side committee organised a rally in Montreal for October 27" "This amount was not authorized nor entered in the expenditure report of the No Committee. This, according to Quebec law, is a case of referendum fraud." 3162:

apologize (as well as apologizing for my rather obnoxious behaviour in the past on this talk page, which was brought about by too much alcohol. In the spirit of academia, I've vowed not to drink and edit Knowledge again.)

2698:. This might be difficult as we will have to dig in old newspapers articles. Hopefully this is made much easier with the Internet. The guys at Vigile.net have archived a lot of the articles we might be interested in. -- 2693:

I suggest we try to distinguish the facts from the interpretations as clearly as possible by making a timeline of events. If you are interested, I invite you to contribute to the draft I am going to prepare soon for a

3148:

In the meantime, though, I replaced it with this cited paragraph from the Toronto Star (using Lexis-Nexis), which provides an example of the aforementioned illegal spending (as well as a rather arrogant quote):

3322:

But what I didn't know (until looking into the matter) was that Bouchard had very publicly said he would just take the jets for his own air force. I suppose I understand his thinking. He takes credit for the

2423:

Regardless, "This, according to Quebec law, is a case of referendum fraud" should be expanded to explain the controversy better. At the moment, the way it is explained is biased and does not tell the whole

2084:

private organization behind it was based in Montreal. Since they have participated, this is not in dispute, then it was only illegal because the spendings went over the limits allowed to the No committee.

1910:

I think we should clean this one up before making another, make sure of accuracy and detail, and wait for more input. The issues of corruption and fraud belong in the main article, in my opinion.

149:

Quote: "A $ 4.8-million federal grant earmarked for the promotion of Canada's official languages financed an anti-separatist operation prior to the 1995 referendum, The Gazette has learned.

3145:

I did this not because I doubt it, but because it's still awaiting a verifiable sources, which I'm sure can be easily taken care of, at which point I think the sentence should be replaced.

196:"These facts have lead many people in the Quebec sovereignty movement to believe that, despite all legal evidence to the contrary, the 1995 referendum was in reality won by the Yes side." 3280:

I think i once heard Normand Lester say that the canadian government, fearing the YES winning withdrew all of the Canadian Air Force jet fighters from quebec juste before the referendum.

2349:" isn't there, nor is any explaination about those very laws violating the charter. This sentence - and the article as a whole - ignores the Supreme Court ruling, which found Quebec law 1935:

I was not suggesting we remove it from this article, just to cover it all in a full separate one. There is a lot of material not yet covered, especially since the release of

2817:

Perhaps it's a question of the fundamental validity of polling. In a practical sense, the question Quebecers responded to in 1995 was 'Do you want Quebec to leave Canada?'

2135:

speeches held on Place du Canada. Some of the expenditures were listed as part of the comittee's expenditures. But don't quote me on this, I'm only going from memory here.

1967:

There has just been a rampage of biased edits by user Bcameron54, whose behaviour reminds me of our favorite hard banned user DW/Angelique/JillandJack/Lafontaine ...

112:

which offered greatly reduced tickets to citizens who wanted to travel to Montreal. The costs associated to the travel expenses was estimated at over $ 4 million."

3327:

contract to build the jets being given to Quebec over Winnipeg, which isn't entirely fair as Mulroney played a part in that deal, in order to woo Quebec voters.

1797:? I found the full French language Quebec Court of Appeal ruling on the case however, I could only find a short summary of the ruling in English. Here it is: 3200:

I would prefer the article to use "Systéme international" numbering (86 000 rather than 86,000), since SI is Canada's standard under the metric system.

1794: 3220:

For good measure I found sources on Lexis-Nexis to back up a lot of what's already in the article and a few things I added, listed under references.

237:

Extraordinarily high rejection rates were well over 5% in some polling stations (the limit of any one scrutineer's reach). respectfully, bcameron54

2695: 3102:= Completely false. The Canadian Constitution and eventually the Supreme Court determines the scope of action of a province or territory. Roux17 104:"In order to get an estimated 10 000 people from the other provinces to join the rally, the No-side benefited from friendly corporations such as 2151: 66: 3224:

Once again though, I have to reiterate a need to clean-up and summarize the second half of the article, and/or move it to it's own page.

2199:

insinuating that it was the Non campaign itself that organized the entire rally. (P.S. I got the term "Quebec Business Council" from the

2514: 2247: 2156: 3384:

federal assets, but that's pretty over-zealous talk from Bouchard - along the same lines of Paul Martin and Larry O'Brien's comments

2829:

going to say *yes*, despite the fact that I don't actually beat my wife at all. (and further, despite the fact that I'm not married.)

2168: 2092:

Personnally, I believe in 1) because a) it is the most plausible scenario and b) there is much evidence to support this scenario.

2823:*their* angle. That's a fact of life, not an example of your political opponent's dishonesty. To put it simply: that's politics. 1886:

There is another related ruling (Alliance Québec c. Directeur général des élections du Québec) which can be read in French here:

2535:

Regardless, this section of the article needs some cleaning up. Maybe wait until you get that book of yours back, though ;-). --

2956: 2341:

I see your point: that, regardless of the Supreme Court's ruling, the Unity Rally was in violation of Quebec provincial law

2799:"Do you agree that the Constitution of Canada should be renewed on the basis of the agreement reached on August 28, 1992?" 2100:

has a lot factual details. I lent the book to someone, but as soon as I have it back, I will source the article better. --

2200: 2345:. But let's look at the article. It reads "This, according to Quebec law, is a case of referendum fraud." The phrase " 1887: 1846: 1810: 47: 17: 3158:

I think the article as a whole is in need of citing it's sources, though I don't doubt the information is out there.

2078:

I am aware that the Unity Rally was organized by then federal minister Brian Tobin. There are two ways to look at it:

3134:"To rally Canadians of all provinces, the organizers were able to obtain important reductions on plane tickets from 2026: 38: 3313:

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's actually a fact. Watch "Breaking Point", the CBC documentary on the referendum.

1863:

The annual reports of the DGEQ don't seem to be available in English either. There are all available in PDF here:

2017:

Regarding the "complex legal document" the June 12 agreement is supposed to be, here is the full text in English:

2113:

If you are aware that it was a body outside of the Non campaign (the Quebec Business Council; later promoted by

2856:

Got the impression that this was written from a separatist point of view. Very anti-federalist in my opinion

2980:

By the way, the Option Canada "case" is still active. I was reading in the Wednesday December 14 edition of

2160: 2255:

legally a case of referendum fraud, as the laws about the referendum were struck down by the Supreme Court.

2027:

Text of the AGREEMENT between the Parti Québécois, the Bloc Québécois,and the Action démocratique du Québec

1811:

Directeur général des élections du Québec c. Fortin (Directeur général des élections du Québec c. Lefebvre)

3385: 2243: 3300:

I heard that too. It seems relevant to know what the contingency planning was by the federal government.

3106:

If this discussion has ended (seems it has), can we please remove the 'neutrality' tag from the article?

3039:

laws do not apply to the federal gov't as noted, therefore I fail to see how this spending is noteworthy.

140:

This information can be read in much detail in English in at least one article published in The Gazette:

3284: 1990: 126:

However, if this can be referencered properly by someone then the proper text might be worth including.

3122: 2087:

2) The leaders of the No committee knew everything from the start but we have not yet found evidence.

3389: 3337: 3240: 3229: 3178: 3163: 2932: 2891: 2861: 2536: 2451: 2118: 2069: 2992:

are currently working together to compile all the financial information that could be found on the

2910: 2874: 2842: 2769: 2733: 2598: 127: 117: 92: 3392: 3371: 3361: 3340: 3304: 3295: 3267: 3243: 3232: 3181: 3166: 3110: 3063: 3001: 2935: 2913: 2894: 2877: 2864: 2845: 2811: 2772: 2736: 2702: 2564: 2539: 2488: 2454: 2394: 2176: 2121: 2104: 2072: 2051: 2033: 2006: 1993: 1974: 1948: 1914: 1893: 1871: 246: 229: 209: 179: 164: 130: 120: 95: 3376:

But we're not talking about Quebec taking a quarter of the jets. Bouchard said he'd just take

3336:

Not only that, but Bouchard was enticing soldiers to defect to a Quebec national army. Wow. --

84: 2387: 1986: 1827:

Summary of the case in the Compendium of Election Administration in Canada for the year 2000

1911: 1849: 1826: 243: 3264: 3060: 2998: 2989: 2808: 2699: 2561: 2485: 2391: 2358:, which were in violation the Charter, and were later struck down by the Supreme Court. 2173: 2101: 2048: 2030: 2003: 1982: 1971: 1945: 1890: 1868: 226: 206: 190: 176: 161: 2993: 2985: 2607:

Unity group waged secret referendum battle, Claude Arpin, The Gazette, March 20, 1997

2606: 2097: 1940: 144: 116:

This general reference needs to be substantiated and then reinserted if appropriate.

91:

This general reference needs to be substantiated and then reinserted if appropriate.

3107: 1793:

Maybe it is time to write a full article on this case. How about an article named:

2057:

This section of the article disturbs me greatly, for it's blatent separatist POV:

3368: 3358: 3301: 3292: 2909:

their point of view and being rather slanted towards a separatist point of view

2602: 2114: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

3324: 3135: 105: 1864: 3127:

Speaking of the Unity Rally, I still believe it deserves it's own article.

3353:

I called it a conspiracy theory 6 weeks ago because the only source given

3139: 2203:

on the Unity Rally, if you were wondering where I came up with that one.)

109: 2873:

just read Disputes over the conduct of the referendum or After Effects

2955:

visitor of en.wikipedia.org. If I ever get the time, I will produce a

2860:

Could you give some examples, or otherwise subtantiate this comment?

2223:

du Québec, something akin to the Business Council of British Columbia?

3088:"The federal government is not bound by provincial laws or statutes." 2890:

I just read those two sections. What is your complaint about them?

1795:

Valid ballots rejected by scrutineers during the 1995 referendum

3021:

contributing to my objections to the neutrality of the article

25: 3357:

was Normand Lester. A more reliable source on this is fine.--

3380:

of them. I'm not saying I don't think Quebec would deserve

3283:

should this be included in the article? and if yes, where?

1785:

tabular or aggregrate data (on this talk page) to follow.

3291:

This article doesn't need any more conspiracy theories.--

3212:

Quebec. Once again, I apologize if I've offended anyone.

2388:

http://www.efc.ca/pages/media/ottawa.citizen.10oct97.html

1981:

restored if he/she is willing to work toward the goal of

2589:

I found an online copy of a source that is used in both

1865:

Publication du Directeur général des élections du Québec

1813:

December 17, 1999 ruling by the Quebec Court of Appeal.

215:

rejected ballots and alleged systematic electoral fraud

2242:

As for the case of referendum fraud - as an aside -

3228:, but I do think it's in need of some cleaning up.-- 2172:directly and indirectly involved in the rally. -- 145:http://www.vigile.net/ds-actu/docs4/2-16.html#mgca 2066:The Unity Rally was NOT part of the Non campaign 3172:"Disputes over the conduct of the referendum" 8: 2959:based on the information in Robin Philpot's 1725:Sainte-Marie -Saint-Jacques 23879 16832 987 3263:same conclusions? Allow me to doubt it. -- 2163:ruling which invalidated some parts of the 1939:. Before this book, a lot a people thought 1845:. The ruling is available in French here: 253: 1713:Saint-Henri -Saint-Anne 17104 19373 910 251:I will try to make it a table, sorry... 2155:rules out third party expenditure. See 2957:Timeline of the 1995 Quebec referendum 2696:Timeline of the 1995 Quebec referendum 1782:Westmount -Saint-Louis 6995 38180 746 100:2) I removed the following paragraph: 79:1) I removed the following paragraph: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3226:I wont touch that part of the article 1731:Salaberry -Soulanges 26068 19614 900 7: 1843:The Gazette v. Conseil du référendum 1743:Taillon 28453 18366 866 3187:Spring Cleaning (More Still Needed) 2515:Libman v. Quebec (Attorney General) 2354:illegal according to Quebec's laws 2248:Libman v. Quebec (Attorney General) 2157:Libman v. Quebec (Attorney General) 1970:Any objection to a full revert? -- 2931:has a separatist point of view.) 1985:instead of imposing his/her view. 24: 3386:that are mentioned in the article 2791:1995 question modeled on 1992 one 2597:. It is an article by journalist 2169:Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec 189:A paragraph was modified by user 1848:and in an English summary here: 1716:Saint-Hyacinthe 22938 18552 676 29: 1779:Vimont 24519 24475 841 1770:Verdun 16269 24062 683 1761:Vanier 25117 20354 989 1758:Vachon 21374 16384 873 1752:Trois-Rivieres 19331 15450 736 3064:16:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC) 1776:Viger 10982 23207 666 1755:Ungava 9187 10396 318 1734:Sauve 11870 17372 710 1728:Saint-Maurice 17779 13973 639 83:"A $ 4.8-million subsidy from 1: 3002:17:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC) 2936:14:22, 16 December 2005 (UTC) 2914:03:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC) 2895:01:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC) 2878:00:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 2865:00:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC) 1773:Viau 10746 23620 681 1722:Saint-Laurent 7213 34856 965 75:Unsubstantiated text removals 2812:17:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC) 2601:first published in print in 2034:20:05, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 2007:19:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 1994:16:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 1975:15:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 1949:23:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 1915:22:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC) 1894:23:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 1872:22:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 247:08:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 2636:Les secrets d'Option Canada 2595:Les secrets d'Option Canada 1937:Les secrets d'Option Canada 1749:Terrebonne 26046 12659 831 1746:Taschereau 17234 12038 687 1740:Sherbrooke 19826 17385 705 1719:Saint-Jean 25496 20025 847 1670:Rouyn-Noranda-Temiscamingu 170:3) DGEQ Inquiry and charges 18:Talk:1995 Quebec referendum 3415: 3305:14:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3296:03:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 2846:05:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC) 2167:, at the time forcing the 1767:Vercheres 22477 11118 701 1764:Vaudreuil 18856 29104 626 2773:04:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC) 2737:04:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC) 2703:16:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC) 2565:17:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 2540:06:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 2489:17:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 2455:07:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 2395:12:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 2177:04:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 2122:00:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 2052:19:49, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 2047:English-speakers too. -- 1737:Shefford 23986 21782 840 230:17:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC) 210:21:03, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 180:19:49, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 165:19:49, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 131:15:24, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 121:15:15, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 96:15:12, 19 July 2005 (UTC) 3393:19:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC) 3372:01:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 3362:19:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 3341:05:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 3268:17:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 3244:08:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 3233:08:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) 3182:22:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC) 3167:05:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC) 3130:I removed this setence: 3111:21:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC) 2605:. You can read it here: 2244:the Supreme Court ruling 2105:14:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC) 2073:07:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC) 153:No side's slim victory. 136:1) $ 4.8-million subsidy 3138:and train tickets from 2560:I will do that. :-) -- 2161:Supreme Court of Canada 982:Kamouraska-Temiscouata 660:Chutes-de-la-chaudiere 386:Beauharnois-Huntingdon 3207:Some Article Rewording 3156: 3143: 1236:Marguerite-D'Youville 842:Hochelaga-Maisonneuve 3151: 3132: 1963:Rampage by Bcameron54 884:Iles-de-la-Madeleine 269:Rejected ballots (%) 42:of past discussions. 1446:Notre-Dame-de-Grace 1215:Marguerite-Bourgeoys 185:What legal evidence? 2484:languages). :-) -- 1502:Point-aux-Trembles 2961:Le Référendum volé 2591:Le référendum volé 2094:Le Référendum volé 1376:Montmagny-L'Islet 1130:Laval-des-Rapides 512:Brome-Missisquoi1 3121:In light of this 2201:CBC Archives page 1711: 1710: 1334:Megantic-Compton 266:Rejected ballots 85:Canadian Heritage 72: 71: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3406: 3196:Numbers protocol 2159:article for the 1600:Riviere-du-Loup 1432:Nicolet-Yamaska 898:Jacques-Cartier 254: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3414: 3413: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3278: 3218: 3209: 3198: 3189: 3174: 3119: 2988:and journalist 2984:that historian 2854: 2793: 2044: 2002:Fine by me. -- 1965: 1841:Same thing for 1698:Saint-Francois 1614:Robert-Baldwin 1250:Marie-Victorin 1010:Lac-Saint-Jean 702:Deux-Montagnes 242:anyone agrees. 217: 187: 172: 138: 77: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3412: 3410: 3402: 3401: 3400: 3399: 3398: 3397: 3396: 3395: 3364: 3346: 3345: 3344: 3343: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3328: 3317: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3308: 3307: 3298: 3277: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3270: 3257: 3256: 3255: 3254: 3247: 3246: 3223: 3217: 3214: 3208: 3205: 3203: 3197: 3194: 3188: 3185: 3173: 3170: 3118: 3117:Grenier Report 3115: 3114: 3113: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3043: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3029: 3028: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3023: 3022: 3011: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3004: 2990:Normand Lester 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2964: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2941: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2897: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2868: 2867: 2853: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2837: 2836: 2831: 2830: 2825: 2824: 2819: 2818: 2792: 2789: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2713: 2712: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2616: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2520: 2519: 2504: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2297: 2285: 2284: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2165:Referendum Act 2152:Referendum Act 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2108: 2107: 2089: 2088: 2085: 2080: 2079: 2056: 2043: 2042:2) Unity Rally 2040: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 1997: 1996: 1964: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1709: 1708: 1705: 1702: 1699: 1695: 1694: 1691: 1688: 1685: 1681: 1680: 1677: 1674: 1671: 1667: 1666: 1663: 1660: 1657: 1653: 1652: 1649: 1646: 1643: 1639: 1638: 1635: 1632: 1629: 1625: 1624: 1621: 1618: 1615: 1611: 1610: 1607: 1604: 1601: 1597: 1596: 1593: 1590: 1587: 1583: 1582: 1579: 1576: 1573: 1569: 1568: 1565: 1562: 1559: 1555: 1554: 1551: 1548: 1545: 1541: 1540: 1537: 1534: 1531: 1527: 1526: 1523: 1520: 1517: 1513: 1512: 1509: 1506: 1503: 1499: 1498: 1495: 1492: 1489: 1485: 1484: 1481: 1478: 1475: 1471: 1470: 1467: 1464: 1461: 1457: 1456: 1453: 1450: 1447: 1443: 1442: 1439: 1436: 1433: 1429: 1428: 1425: 1422: 1419: 1415: 1414: 1411: 1408: 1405: 1401: 1400: 1397: 1394: 1391: 1387: 1386: 1383: 1380: 1377: 1373: 1372: 1369: 1366: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1355: 1352: 1349: 1345: 1344: 1341: 1338: 1335: 1331: 1330: 1327: 1324: 1321: 1317: 1316: 1313: 1310: 1307: 1303: 1302: 1299: 1296: 1293: 1289: 1288: 1285: 1282: 1279: 1275: 1274: 1271: 1268: 1265: 1261: 1260: 1257: 1254: 1251: 1247: 1246: 1243: 1240: 1237: 1233: 1232: 1227: 1222: 1217: 1211: 1210: 1207: 1204: 1201: 1197: 1196: 1193: 1190: 1187: 1183: 1182: 1179: 1176: 1173: 1169: 1168: 1165: 1162: 1159: 1155: 1154: 1151: 1148: 1145: 1141: 1140: 1137: 1134: 1131: 1127: 1126: 1121: 1116: 1111: 1109:Laurier-Dorion 1105: 1104: 1101: 1098: 1095: 1091: 1090: 1087: 1084: 1081: 1077: 1076: 1073: 1070: 1067: 1063: 1062: 1059: 1056: 1053: 1049: 1048: 1045: 1042: 1039: 1035: 1034: 1031: 1028: 1025: 1021: 1020: 1017: 1014: 1011: 1007: 1006: 1003: 1000: 997: 993: 992: 989: 986: 983: 979: 978: 975: 972: 969: 965: 964: 961: 958: 955: 951: 950: 947: 944: 941: 937: 936: 933: 930: 927: 923: 922: 919: 916: 913: 909: 908: 905: 902: 899: 895: 894: 891: 888: 885: 881: 880: 877: 874: 871: 867: 866: 863: 860: 857: 853: 852: 849: 846: 843: 839: 838: 835: 832: 829: 825: 824: 821: 818: 815: 811: 810: 807: 804: 801: 797: 796: 793: 790: 787: 783: 782: 779: 776: 773: 769: 768: 765: 762: 759: 755: 754: 751: 748: 745: 741: 740: 737: 734: 731: 727: 726: 723: 720: 717: 713: 712: 709: 706: 703: 699: 698: 695: 692: 689: 685: 684: 681: 678: 675: 671: 670: 667: 664: 661: 657: 656: 651: 646: 641: 635: 634: 631: 628: 625: 621: 620: 617: 614: 611: 607: 606: 603: 600: 597: 593: 592: 589: 586: 583: 579: 578: 575: 572: 569: 565: 564: 561: 558: 555: 551: 550: 547: 544: 541: 537: 536: 533: 530: 527: 523: 522: 519: 516: 513: 509: 508: 505: 502: 499: 495: 494: 491: 488: 485: 481: 480: 477: 474: 471: 467: 466: 463: 460: 457: 453: 452: 449: 446: 443: 439: 438: 435: 432: 429: 425: 424: 421: 418: 415: 411: 410: 407: 404: 401: 397: 396: 393: 390: 387: 383: 382: 379: 376: 373: 369: 368: 365: 362: 359: 355: 354: 351: 348: 345: 341: 340: 337: 334: 331: 327: 326: 323: 320: 317: 313: 312: 309: 306: 303: 299: 298: 295: 292: 289: 288:Abitibi-Ouest 285: 284: 281: 278: 275: 271: 270: 267: 264: 261: 258: 239: 238: 233: 232: 216: 213: 186: 183: 171: 168: 137: 134: 114: 113: 89: 88: 76: 73: 70: 69: 64: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3411: 3394: 3391: 3387: 3383: 3379: 3375: 3374: 3373: 3370: 3365: 3363: 3360: 3356: 3352: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3342: 3339: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3326: 3321: 3320: 3319: 3318: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3306: 3303: 3299: 3297: 3294: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3286: 3285:Simon.bastien 3281: 3275: 3269: 3266: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3258: 3251: 3250: 3249: 3248: 3245: 3242: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3231: 3227: 3221: 3215: 3213: 3206: 3204: 3201: 3195: 3193: 3186: 3184: 3183: 3180: 3171: 3169: 3168: 3165: 3159: 3155: 3150: 3146: 3142: 3141: 3137: 3131: 3128: 3125: 3123: 3116: 3112: 3109: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3065: 3062: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3019: 3018: 3017: 3016: 3015: 3014: 3013: 3012: 3003: 3000: 2995: 2994:Option Canada 2991: 2987: 2986:Robin Philpot 2983: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2962: 2958: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2937: 2934: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2915: 2912: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2896: 2893: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2879: 2876: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2866: 2863: 2859: 2858: 2857: 2851: 2847: 2844: 2839: 2838: 2833: 2832: 2827: 2826: 2821: 2820: 2816: 2815: 2814: 2813: 2810: 2804: 2800: 2797: 2790: 2774: 2771: 2766: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2757: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2738: 2735: 2730: 2729: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2718: 2717: 2704: 2701: 2697: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2637: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2621: 2608: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2566: 2563: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2541: 2538: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2516: 2513:I agree that 2512: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2490: 2487: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2456: 2453: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2396: 2393: 2389: 2384: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2357: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2287: 2286: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2254: 2249: 2245: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2202: 2197: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2178: 2175: 2170: 2166: 2162: 2158: 2154: 2153: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2142: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2123: 2120: 2116: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2106: 2103: 2099: 2098:Robin Philpot 2095: 2091: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2081: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2071: 2067: 2061: 2058: 2054: 2053: 2050: 2041: 2035: 2032: 2028: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2008: 2005: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1995: 1992: 1988: 1984: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1973: 1968: 1962: 1950: 1947: 1942: 1941:Option Canada 1938: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1916: 1913: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1902: 1895: 1892: 1888: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1873: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1850: 1847: 1844: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1828: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1812: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1796: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1783: 1780: 1777: 1774: 1771: 1768: 1765: 1762: 1759: 1756: 1753: 1750: 1747: 1744: 1741: 1738: 1735: 1732: 1729: 1726: 1723: 1720: 1717: 1714: 1706: 1703: 1700: 1697: 1696: 1692: 1689: 1686: 1683: 1682: 1678: 1675: 1672: 1669: 1668: 1664: 1661: 1658: 1655: 1654: 1650: 1647: 1644: 1641: 1640: 1636: 1633: 1630: 1627: 1626: 1622: 1619: 1616: 1613: 1612: 1608: 1605: 1602: 1599: 1598: 1594: 1591: 1588: 1585: 1584: 1580: 1577: 1574: 1571: 1570: 1566: 1563: 1560: 1557: 1556: 1552: 1549: 1546: 1543: 1542: 1538: 1535: 1532: 1529: 1528: 1524: 1521: 1518: 1515: 1514: 1510: 1507: 1504: 1501: 1500: 1496: 1493: 1490: 1487: 1486: 1482: 1479: 1476: 1473: 1472: 1468: 1465: 1462: 1459: 1458: 1454: 1451: 1448: 1445: 1444: 1440: 1437: 1434: 1431: 1430: 1426: 1423: 1420: 1417: 1416: 1412: 1409: 1406: 1403: 1402: 1398: 1395: 1392: 1389: 1388: 1384: 1381: 1378: 1375: 1374: 1370: 1367: 1364: 1361: 1360: 1356: 1353: 1350: 1347: 1346: 1342: 1339: 1336: 1333: 1332: 1328: 1325: 1322: 1319: 1318: 1314: 1311: 1308: 1305: 1304: 1300: 1297: 1294: 1291: 1290: 1286: 1283: 1280: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1269: 1266: 1263: 1262: 1258: 1255: 1252: 1249: 1248: 1244: 1241: 1238: 1235: 1234: 1231: 1228: 1226: 1223: 1221: 1218: 1216: 1213: 1212: 1208: 1205: 1202: 1200:Louis-Hebert 1199: 1198: 1194: 1191: 1188: 1185: 1184: 1180: 1177: 1174: 1171: 1170: 1166: 1163: 1160: 1157: 1156: 1152: 1149: 1146: 1143: 1142: 1138: 1135: 1132: 1129: 1128: 1125: 1122: 1120: 1117: 1115: 1112: 1110: 1107: 1106: 1102: 1099: 1096: 1094:L'Assomption 1093: 1092: 1088: 1085: 1082: 1079: 1078: 1074: 1071: 1068: 1065: 1064: 1060: 1057: 1054: 1051: 1050: 1046: 1043: 1040: 1037: 1036: 1032: 1029: 1026: 1023: 1022: 1018: 1015: 1012: 1009: 1008: 1004: 1001: 998: 995: 994: 990: 987: 984: 981: 980: 976: 973: 970: 967: 966: 962: 959: 956: 953: 952: 948: 945: 942: 939: 938: 934: 931: 928: 925: 924: 920: 917: 914: 912:Jeanne-Mance 911: 910: 906: 903: 900: 897: 896: 892: 889: 886: 883: 882: 878: 875: 872: 869: 868: 864: 861: 858: 855: 854: 850: 847: 844: 841: 840: 836: 833: 830: 827: 826: 822: 819: 816: 813: 812: 808: 805: 802: 799: 798: 794: 791: 788: 785: 784: 780: 777: 774: 771: 770: 766: 763: 760: 757: 756: 752: 749: 746: 743: 742: 738: 735: 732: 729: 728: 724: 721: 718: 715: 714: 710: 707: 704: 701: 700: 696: 693: 690: 688:D'Arcy-McGee 687: 686: 682: 679: 676: 673: 672: 668: 665: 662: 659: 658: 655: 652: 650: 647: 645: 642: 640: 637: 636: 632: 629: 626: 623: 622: 618: 615: 612: 609: 608: 604: 601: 598: 595: 594: 590: 587: 584: 581: 580: 576: 573: 570: 568:Charlesbourg 567: 566: 562: 559: 556: 553: 552: 548: 545: 542: 539: 538: 534: 531: 528: 525: 524: 520: 517: 514: 511: 510: 506: 503: 500: 497: 496: 492: 489: 486: 483: 482: 478: 475: 472: 469: 468: 464: 461: 458: 455: 454: 450: 447: 444: 441: 440: 436: 433: 430: 427: 426: 422: 419: 416: 413: 412: 408: 405: 402: 399: 398: 394: 391: 388: 385: 384: 380: 377: 374: 371: 370: 366: 363: 360: 357: 356: 352: 349: 346: 343: 342: 338: 335: 332: 329: 328: 324: 321: 318: 315: 314: 310: 307: 304: 301: 300: 296: 293: 290: 287: 286: 282: 279: 276: 273: 272: 268: 265: 262: 259: 256: 255: 252: 249: 248: 245: 235: 234: 231: 228: 223: 222: 221: 214: 212: 211: 208: 203: 197: 194: 192: 184: 182: 181: 178: 169: 167: 166: 163: 158: 154: 150: 147: 146: 141: 135: 133: 132: 129: 128:A. Lafontaine 123: 122: 119: 118:A. Lafontaine 111: 107: 103: 102: 101: 98: 97: 94: 93:A. Lafontaine 86: 82: 81: 80: 74: 68: 65: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3381: 3377: 3354: 3282: 3279: 3276:Fighter Jets 3225: 3222: 3219: 3216:More Sources 3210: 3202: 3199: 3190: 3175: 3160: 3157: 3152: 3147: 3144: 3133: 3129: 3126: 3120: 3101: 2981: 2960: 2855: 2805: 2801: 2798: 2794: 2635: 2599:Claude Arpin 2594: 2590: 2355: 2350: 2346: 2342: 2252: 2195: 2164: 2150: 2093: 2065: 2062: 2059: 2055: 2045: 1969: 1966: 1936: 1842: 1784: 1781: 1778: 1775: 1772: 1769: 1766: 1763: 1760: 1757: 1754: 1751: 1748: 1745: 1742: 1739: 1736: 1733: 1730: 1727: 1724: 1721: 1718: 1715: 1712: 1390:Montmorency 1362:Milles-Iles 1229: 1224: 1219: 1214: 1123: 1118: 1113: 1108: 653: 648: 643: 638: 596:Chateauguay 456:Bonaventure 400:Bellechasse 358:Beauce-Nord 274:Abitibi-Est 260:Yes ballots 250: 240: 218: 201: 198: 195: 188: 173: 159: 155: 151: 148: 142: 139: 124: 115: 99: 90: 78: 60: 43: 37: 2603:The Gazette 2518:misleading. 2356:at the time 2351:at the time 2347:at the time 2343:at the time 2115:Brian Tobin 1987:Ground Zero 1404:Mont-Royal 1278:Maskinonge 1186:Lotbiniere 1144:Laviolette 1052:La Piniere 1038:La Peltrie 1024:Lafontaine 926:Jean-Talon 624:Chicoutimi 582:Charlevoix 442:Blainville 372:Beauce-Sud 344:Arthabaska 330:Argenteuil 263:No ballots 36:This is an 3325:Bombardier 3136:Air Canada 2852:Neutrality 1983:Neutrality 1912:Bcameron54 1642:Rosemount 1558:Richelieu 1474:Outremont 1320:Matapedia 1264:Marquette 1080:LaPrairie 968:Jonquiere 870:Iberville 772:Frontenac 744:Duplessis 540:Champlain 244:Bcameron54 106:Air Canada 3390:Willmolls 3338:Willmolls 3287:april 17 3265:Mathieugp 3241:Willmolls 3230:Willmolls 3179:Willmolls 3164:Willmolls 3061:Mathieugp 2999:Mathieugp 2982:Le Devoir 2933:HistoryBA 2892:HistoryBA 2862:HistoryBA 2809:Mathieugp 2700:Mathieugp 2562:Mathieugp 2537:Willmolls 2486:Mathieugp 2452:Willmolls 2392:Mathieugp 2174:Mathieugp 2119:Willmolls 2102:Mathieugp 2070:Willmolls 2049:Mathieugp 2031:Mathieugp 2004:Mathieugp 1972:Mathieugp 1946:Mathieugp 1891:Mathieugp 1869:Mathieugp 1684:Saguenay 1656:Rousseau 1628:Roberval 1586:Rimouski 1572:Richmond 1530:Portneuf 1488:Papineau 1418:Nelligan 1172:Limoilou 954:Joliette 800:Gatineau 716:Drummond 674:Cremazie 610:Chauveau 554:Chapleau 484:Bourassa 428:Bertrand 414:Berthier 227:Mathieugp 207:Mathieugp 191:Krinberry 177:Mathieugp 162:Mathieugp 67:Archive 2 61:Archive 1 3140:Via Rail 2911:Thetrump 2875:Thetrump 1544:Prevost 1516:Pontiac 1348:Mercier 1066:Laporte 996:Labelle 940:Johnson 639:Chomedey 526:Chambly 498:Bourget 470:Borduas 143:Source: 110:Via Rail 3108:GoodDay 2843:Sigma-6 2770:Sigma-6 2734:Sigma-6 1460:Orford 1306:Matane 1292:Masson 1044:218444 828:Groulx 302:Acadie 257:Riding 39:archive 3369:Joeldl 3359:Boffob 3302:Joeldl 3293:Boffob 2424:story. 1704:19203 1701:19211 1687:23037 1676:17249 1673:20553 1662:13514 1659:24147 1648:16282 1645:18814 1634:13541 1631:25194 1620:38430 1606:12114 1603:14561 1592:12684 1589:22292 1578:13856 1575:15719 1564:13593 1561:22490 1550:15746 1547:26097 1536:16235 1533:19304 1522:30920 1508:13768 1505:21425 1494:21561 1491:12371 1480:25269 1477:13362 1466:23130 1463:20773 1452:31305 1438:13114 1435:16992 1424:42498 1410:32355 1396:20914 1393:28350 1382:15273 1379:12289 1368:21231 1365:22668 1354:14744 1351:24687 1340:14535 1337:13042 1323:17294 1309:15511 1298:11683 1295:28636 1284:16914 1281:22504 1270:21739 1267:13627 1256:14814 1253:22731 1242:16520 1239:23778 1206:17790 1203:20292 1192:13205 1189:13263 1178:19566 1175:21109 1164:15210 1161:19811 1158:Levis 1150:13094 1147:17356 1136:17146 1133:19035 1100:16614 1097:29095 1086:19919 1083:30007 1072:25141 1069:17447 1058:28261 1055:14006 1041:26381 1030:26373 1027:17779 1013:25858 1002:11631 999:21053 988:14055 985:15632 974:11584 971:28385 960:14194 957:25096 946:14670 943:17507 932:16158 929:14921 918:26449 915:18654 904:40689 876:18178 873:23400 862:28553 859:12394 845:18511 834:16879 831:22143 820:15977 817:21854 814:Gouin 806:25153 803:10873 792:10771 789:15186 786:Gaspe 778:15112 775:17044 764:22341 761:23546 758:Fabre 750:12319 747:20741 733:22850 730:Dubuc 722:18267 719:24866 708:20780 705:29831 694:37228 680:18041 677:17120 666:19587 663:29465 630:13348 627:29262 616:23855 613:28574 602:20216 599:18473 588:12029 585:15702 574:20534 571:23346 560:37788 557:14354 546:15978 543:24534 532:20734 529:25241 518:21425 504:14857 501:17260 490:17084 487:13063 476:13470 473:18864 462:13761 459:12914 448:13585 445:23132 434:17080 431:19867 420:15251 417:25884 406:13927 403:12425 392:19537 389:16821 378:20813 375:15365 364:15794 361:12733 350:17225 347:22235 336:21637 333:21475 322:15722 319:15419 316:Anjou 308:32423 294:11093 291:17969 280:11980 277:16447 2666:case. 2390:. -- 2318:time. 1690:8386 1617:4772 1553:1001 1519:4484 1449:4855 1421:9441 1407:5059 1326:9600 1312:9381 1259:1137 1225:27517 1220:10157 1119:25921 1114:15384 1016:9541 901:4016 890:3946 887:5478 856:Hull 848:9759 736:9651 711:1068 691:1401 649:29988 644:11273 619:1091 515:3476 305:9167 16:< 3355:then 2593:and 2251:was 1707:770 1693:604 1679:512 1665:629 1651:758 1637:305 1623:485 1609:401 1595:280 1581:352 1567:654 1539:662 1525:446 1511:550 1497:282 1483:649 1469:655 1455:864 1441:470 1427:775 1413:908 1399:728 1385:566 1371:819 1357:803 1343:390 1329:383 1315:329 1301:813 1287:667 1273:482 1245:693 1230:2194 1209:431 1195:441 1181:881 1167:634 1153:537 1139:751 1124:1552 1103:487 1089:708 1075:801 1061:379 1047:843 1033:766 1019:340 1005:485 991:451 977:705 963:744 949:538 935:495 921:719 907:409 893:134 879:872 865:683 851:660 837:782 823:805 809:357 795:410 781:324 767:905 753:366 739:326 725:753 697:741 683:799 669:531 654:5450 633:369 605:406 591:381 577:745 563:895 549:511 535:722 521:497 507:750 493:639 479:579 465:411 451:581 437:453 423:723 409:386 395:585 381:626 367:450 353:712 339:485 325:522 311:425 297:418 283:511 108:and 3382:any 3378:all 2253:not 2246:on 2196:not 2096:by 2029:-- 1889:-- 1867:-- 202:all 160:-- 3239:-- 3177:-- 2450:-- 1989:| 193:: 1991:t 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index