The Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ) is holding its 34e congress of members. Dominique Anglade must take advantage of this event to strike a blow, say the media. His leadership would be threatened, it is said. However, it would be wrong to make it the victim of this party’s post-national slippage. Because there is slippage.
By contemplating the prospect of a strong – and perhaps even more centralized – Canada and a unifying Canadian identity, the PLQ has gradually moved away from the unique relationship it had forged over the years. with Quebecers and their political and constitutional aspirations.
I would be curious to do a survey among the members of the PLQ to find out what they think of the right of Quebecers to choose their future, of Quebec’s assertion on the international scene or of Quebec’s territorial integrity.
PHOTO EDOUARD PLANTE-FRÉCHETTE, ARCHIVES THE PRESS
Dominique Anglade must deal with a deep malaise within the Liberal Party, according to the author.
For years, the PLQ has put its efforts in the fight against sovereignty and, more particularly, in the sustained defense of Canadian federalism. But this dynamic sovereignty against federalism has become less relevant, so that the PLQ must redefine itself in a Quebec which is itself undergoing profound change. To this end, I have taken the liberty of addressing a few themes here, which are all avenues for reflection and perhaps even solutions.
First, the PLQ must reconnect with its identity fiber and it must do so sincerely, and not by pure electoral calculation.
The fact that Canada is a nation seems indisputable to me. But it is the same for the existence of the Quebec nation. And what about that of the Aboriginal peoples, the Acadian people, etc. The pluri or multinational character of Canada is obvious. As for the specificity of Quebec, it must be valued, promoted and formally recognized within Canada. That Quebec seeks to assert itself in its own originality within the Canadian framework and even on the international scene is only normal. On this last point, I would remind you that the Gérin-Lajoie doctrine – which advocates the international extension of Quebec’s internal powers – is part of the liberal heritage.
Second, it is clear in my mind that Quebeckers must have the right to decide their own future. This does not prevent them from wishing to continue to assume their destiny within the Canadian federative bond. While I was in politics, I tried to convince Quebeckers that Canadian federalism was the best option: not the only one! In my opinion, the link between Quebec and Canada cannot be unconditional, nor can it necessarily be eternal. On the contrary, at the risk of paraphrasing Ernest Renan, I would say that the adherence of Quebecers to Canadian federalism is “an everyday plebiscite”. No one is entirely sure where Canada will go in the future.
What we are sure of, however, is that the centralizing temptation of Canadian federalism is obvious, and that the latter sometimes tends to crush its intrinsic diversity, including the national characteristics of Quebec.
Third, it should be remembered that federalism postulates the sovereignty of the provinces in their field of legislative competence. Nothing less. This sovereignty is in a way a constitutionally protected autonomy. One cannot therefore be a true federalist without being an autonomist. This does not mean, however, that we want Quebec to benefit from sovereignty or total autonomy, which is characteristic of sovereignty. It simply means that we want Quebec’s autonomy within Canada to be preserved, even extended.
French language
Fourth, the French language constitutes another issue in relation to which the PLQ must strongly reposition itself. Indeed, it emerges from this that this language is strongly threatened at the moment. This is the result, which was moreover highly predictable, of the rapid anglicization of the planet and the phenomenon of acculturation which we are witnessing, powerless. The French language must be displayed loud and clear. It must seek to shine more. Its development must also be supported by laws, as Bill 96 attempts to do. We must repeat in every way and in all forums that French is the only official language of Quebec – apart from the embryonic form of bilingualism in certain matters contained in article 133 of the Constitution Act, 1982 – and that it is the common language of Quebecers.
Fifth, it emerges from this that the use of exemption provisions is a serious irritant for the PLQ. However, this type of measure makes it possible to give the last word in certain matters to the legislator rather than leaving it to the courts. The derogation provisions do not run counter to the separation of powers in the state. Rather, they are part of it. They sort of confirm it. Whether one is for or against the use of exemption provisions in principle, they cannot be condemned in any event, regardless of the circumstances. They exist. They are part of the country’s constitution and quasi-constitutional laws. Their use is perfectly legitimate, especially when it is only occasional or exceptional. The all-out and unqualified denunciation of the exemption provisions by the PLQ is reckless. It also goes against the best interests of Quebec.
Finally, sixth, I believe that the fact that the PLQ defends individual rights and freedoms is an excellent thing. After all, no word comes closer to the word freedom than the word liberal. But the defense of rights and freedoms should not be a fixation.
First, because rights and freedoms cannot themselves be absolute. Then, because the interpretation and application of rights and freedoms must be contextual, that is to say, it must take into account the social environment in which they develop and evolve. Finally, because sometimes it is rather collective choices or issues that must predominate. Speaking precisely of collective issues, it would be important for the PLQ to take ownership of a few issues and defend them with vigor and conviction, such as the advancement of the French language and the culture it conveys, the adoption of a Constitution. purely Quebecois, the consolidation of the international role of Quebec and the rehabilitation of the constitutional file.
The PLQ is a party of power, of course, but if power was so frequently entrusted to it by the people of Quebec, it is above all because it was a party of balance. However, I have the impression that this balance has been somewhat upset recently. And we cannot hold it against Dominique Anglade. She has to deal with a deep unease within the party, an unease that goes beyond or largely transcends the issue of leadership.
It is as if the PLQ were looking for its soul. A refocusing is necessary, not between the right and the left, but rather between individual freedom and the collective interest of the Quebec nation.
What do you think? Express your opinion