The Gall of Quebec MNA’s

Webster’s dictionary describes gall as “brazen boldness coupled with impudent assurance and insolence”. In other words, it perfectly describes every current sitting MNA in Quebec’s National assembly. Imagine the gall one must have to propose a law to increase their salary by 31%. All this during one of the most volatile times of recent memory in Quebec. 

How does one go about justifying such an increase during times of so called austerity ? We supposedly have no money to pay our teachers, nurses , and doctors. The same professionals that we entrust to educate our children and future generation. The same professionals that care for us when we’re sick and vulnerable. One can argue three of the most essential professions for any society to exist and prosper. Our politicians keep shitting on them as if their demands are not realistic. What reality do our politicians live in when they think asking for a raise is anywhere close to being a good idea ?

How does one go about justifying this increase by stating Quebec will save over 400,000$ on a yearly basis ? First off, in the grand scheme of things, what good is 400,000$ when you’re spending 600,000$ to renovate a gazebo ? This magical number was justified with changes to their allowances, pensions, and eliminating departure bonuses. Departure bonuses, what a crock of garage ! Find me a business that will pay you a departure bonus when you voluntarily leave and I’ll find you JFK’s assasin. An asinine and proposterous idea that should have never seen the light of day. 

I could just imagine what world these politicians live in. There must be unicorns and leprechauns running around in complete freedom. Where money falls from the sky or can be picked from a tree and Walt Disney is the Premier. The truth is that they just don’t care what any of us think. If they did, they wouldn’t come up with these proposals. It’s a sad reality and we’re helpless as we put them there to decide their own salaries. 


2 thoughts on “The Gall of Quebec MNA’s”

  1. Why is there nothing more current stating: What they will receive, what they previously received, and what other “entitlements” are thrown into the mix?


    1. Please keep in mind that these were just recommendations on how the Couillard government planned to review remuneration including the Transition allowance or severance package.The suggestion was to eliminate it by introducing a pay raise from the current $88,000 to $136,000. How the two are related is beyond me. Does this mean that if they receive a higher base salary they won’t leave politics and thus there won’t be a need to pay a so called transition package. The argument is ridiculous.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s