The abandonment of the Mâchurer investigation into the financing of the Liberal Party of Quebec when he was its leader is, of course, good news for Jean Charest, when he is about to plunge into the leadership race. of the Conservative Party of Canada.
Posted at 6:00 a.m.
Except that now, we are going to be interested in Jean Charest for completely different reasons and by using a completely different grid from the one that was still in effect a decade ago, when he left politics.
But let’s close the UPAC file first. She conducted this case with rigor. But after eight years of investigation and 300 witnesses, and a file submitted to a committee chaired by a former judge of the Court of Appeal of Quebec, no one has seen grounds to lay charges. Or, in any case, not enough evidence to have a real chance of obtaining convictions. After this observation, it was necessary to stop the Mâchurer investigation.
It will remain that, for many people, this will not change anything, and a smell of corruption will always be associated with the former Prime Minister. Those who love Jean Charest really love him. But those who hate him are just as resolute.
Nevertheless, from the moment he enters the race for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, we will look at Jean Charest and ask ourselves completely different questions. And first and foremost: are the qualities that made him a true political beast and gave him three terms as prime minister with almost a decade in power the ones that could lead him to victory in a year or two?
We generally recognize two great qualities in this stupid politician that is Jean Charest: he is an outstanding speaker and his personal relations with the members of his caucus or his party are remarkable. “Not only does he know the name of your wife and children, he even remembers their birthdays,” say his former colleagues.
It’s good to be a great speaker, but election campaigns are no longer about large gatherings to hear the leader’s speech. Because – except perhaps in France, where the season for large meetings is in full swing – we no longer do electoral campaigns that way.
Today, it is much more important to have an effective presence on social networks than to make great speeches. Mr. Charest has virtually no presence on these networks – there is a Twitter account in the name of @JeanCharest1, but it is dormant. (There are also at least three satirical accounts that use his name.)
By way of comparison, note that the video announcing the candidacy of Pierre Poilievre has been viewed more than four million times on Twitter. Needless to say, Mr. Charest’s only avowed opponent has an established presence on social media — but not just in Canada.
When Mr. Charest left politics after his defeat in 2012, Instagram had just been bought by Facebook, which would give it its flight, and TikTok did not yet exist. Today, having a presence on these platforms is just as important, if not more, than having good organizers.
Obviously, we can hire people who will take care of ensuring a presence, but that does not guarantee quality or – and above all – authenticity. Because poorly managed social networks sound as fake as the “cane laughs” of TV comedies of yesteryear.
Finally, Mr. Charest will have to be able to convince his new party that he is a “true conservative”, sauce 2022, he who thought in 2020 that this party had changed too much for him to become its leader.
Already, those who describe themselves as the “true conservatives” are getting active. Of particular note is a tweet from Jenni Byrne, who worked in the office of Prime Ministers Stephen Harper and Doug Ford.
“Charest is a Liberal who campaigned against Stephen Harper, who supported the gun registry, raised taxes and imposed a carbon tax and worked for Huawei while the Chinese detained kidnapped Canadians,” said- she.
Of course, M.me Byrne is not an official spokesperson for Mr. Harper, Mr. Ford or anyone else, but it is clear that she represents a side of the party that wants nothing to do with a leader like Jean Charest.
On the other side, there are still those “Red Tories”, who want a more centrist leader and program and who do not want a leader like Pierre Poilievre.
Which announces a hard and dirty leadership race, where the two camps will say they want a debate of ideas and where we will quickly find ourselves in a rat race.