In an interesting documentary broadcast Saturday evening on Radio-Canada, Francine Pelletier retraces the path taken by the Parti Québécois – which was for a long time the most progressive political party on the Quebec political spectrum – to embody, today, a nationalism essentially identity.
Posted May 29
In an intellectual rather than political examination, we seek the origin of this change of direction that the film situates in the defeat of the second referendum on sovereignty, in 1995. The sociologist Gérard Bouchard is the one who is the most eloquent on this subject, while he says that the sovereignists are still dealing with the “debris of the two referendum failures”.
But he is far from being the first to make these observations. Already, in 2016, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon – newly become a member of the PQ after its “political orphan” phase – had been entrusted by its new leader, Jean-François Lisée, with the mission of carrying out a broad consultation to rethink and relaunch the PQ.
In his preliminary report of February 2017, the conclusions of Paul St-Pierre Plamondon were very harsh. The PQ had become “frozen, conservative and aging”. The actions of the government of Pauline Marois had been very different from its electoral program, in particular on the question of the environment. For example, the PQ had been elected by speaking of “getting Quebec out of oil”, but it wanted to exploit oil on Anticosti Island, if ever it was found…
Paul St-Pierre Plamondon also noted that the PQ’s proposals on secularism, immigration and religious symbols were causing divisions between older and younger activists, who no longer saw the link between secularism and identity. He also deplored that the party had got rid of the humanist roots of René Lévesque.
And, finally, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon said that “the discussion on the timetable for the next referendum overshadows all the other discussions, including those on the reasons underlying the quest for independence”.
Today leader of the PQ, Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon wants a referendum in his first term.
The fact remains that his observation – in his preliminary report, the final version was a little less sharp – is very similar to that of Francine Pelletier’s documentary. The PQ has become old and conservative. And his identity shift has alienated him from many voters, especially the youngest and those from diversity.
If the documentary titled Battle for the soul of Quebec has a fault, it is not to have taken the measure of a defeat of the PQ which had almost as much impact as that of the referendum of 1995. It is about the electoral campaign of 2007, in full “ crisis” of reasonable accommodation, when the PQ finished in third place, ahead of Mario Dumont’s Action Démocratique.
The latter had taken up the hobby horse of reasonable accommodation and had led his party to the official opposition. The PQ was beaten on a question of identity and it did not digest it. Never again would he be downgraded in this area.
Even though the PQ was the third party in the National Assembly and had no chance of getting it passed, the new leader of the PQ, Pauline Marois, tabled a Quebec identity bill that would have established Quebec citizenship. which would only be conferred, among others, on those who have “an appropriate knowledge” of French and of Quebec.
The bill was clearly unconstitutional – it would have taken away the right to vote for some people, even if only in school elections – and provided for a three-year “integration contract” for newcomers.
But in this project, which died on the order paper, was already the very essence of the Charter of Values which was to take up a lot of space during the mandate of the minority government of Pauline Marois.
A bill that would ban the wearing of religious symbols by all state employees, even those who had no contact with the public, but kept the crucifix in the National Assembly. We know the rest.
But to have its maximum political effect, the Charter of Values did not need to come into force. In fact, it became much more useful if it had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Moreover, the Minister responsible for the Charter, Bernard Drainville, had to admit that he had never sought a formal legal opinion from the Department of Justice, as is required in the circumstances.
We can conclude, like Francine Pelletier’s documentary, that the PQ has made an identity and conservative turn. But in terms of political strategy, the episode of the Charter of Values and its subsequent positions show that what the PQ really wants is to be told no. Hoping in this way to rekindle the vast popular anger that followed the refusal to ratify the Meech Lake accord.
In short, if we can’t get a Yes, couldn’t a No advance the cause?