Yesterday, one of The Gazette's political columnists, Don MacPherson said that Gérard Bouchard, one of the president of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission, should resign. Apparently, in an interview given to the weekly newspaper Voir, Bouchard admitted that French Quebeckers are having quite a hard time with the "debate" on "reasonnable accommodations", because they "react like [ethnic minorities], display the same feelings of fear, threat, fragility [and] roughness."
Here's the pièce de résistance of the news created by The Gazette that wasn't a news as such: Gérard Bouchard said that achieving the independence of Quebec will solve all our problems concerning reasonnable accommodations. Moreover, this sociologist added that the separation would act as a glue to unite all people living in Quebec.
Now, that's a hell of a good joke if you consider Quebec's History since 1840! Ok, let's get back to the point. Sociologist Gérard Bouchard spilled his opinion opinion out while he wasn't on duty as one of the heads of the study commission on "reasonnable accommodations".
Ok, Gérard Bouchard's adherence to separatism wasn't a secret. So what? Everybody knew beforehand that his colleague in the commission, philosopher Charles Taylor, is well-known for his federalist stance and his blind advocacy of multiculturalism. Aren't we supposed to ask Taylor to resign? Here's a good idea for Don MacPherson: he should write a sequel to his column. Indeed, why doesn't MacPherson ask Charles Taylor to resign?
Seriously, both Bouchard and Taylor certainly know that they're supposed to give advices to the Quebecker government by taking in consideration the current political context, right? Picture this: Quebec is a Canadian province. Both Bouchard and Taylor are not supposed to try to tout their political views (i.e. separation vs federalism).
That's the kind of objectivity that is needed. In other words, Bouchard and Taylor are supposed to put aside the political option (separation or federalism) that they favour the most. Whether you like to hear it or not, people who are asked to be part of a commission are supposed to be impartial. That's the way it works.
Even though the creation of this commission wasn't necessary at all, let's not be surprised that such an opinion-piece was published in The Gazette. Don MacPherson should really stop taking things out of their context if he knows what I mean...
PS: I'm still against the creation commission, by the way. Secondly, why the hell does the inquiry of Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor start in September while the commission was created on February 8, 2007?