(Quebec) Data on the state of health and financial situation of certain people prevents us from shedding any light on the financing and expenses of the No camp in the 1995 sovereignty referendum.
This is what Québec solidaire (QS) maintains from the reasons given by the Director General of Elections (DGEQ), Jean-François Blanchet, for not disclosing all of the evidence of the Grenier commission, responsible for investigating allegations of hidden financing in 2007.
Unless a law is adopted or a mechanism is adopted to anonymize data, the DGEQ will not make public the thousands of documents at its disposal, summarized MP Sol Zanetti, from QS.
Friday morning, elected officials from each party were able to meet Mr. Blanchet, who refuses to comply with two motions from the National Assembly calling on him to lift the confidentiality of the evidence he holds.
The DGEQ argues that the evidence remains “confidential without time limit”, under the order issued by Judge Bernard Grenier at the time.
Mr. Blanchet “mentions the fact that there are personal data relating to people or relatives, people who have testified, data on their state of health, their financial situation, which could be damaging to their reputation”, and this could expose the DGEQ to prosecution, reported Mr. Zanetti, in a press scrum outside parliament, after the meeting.
According to him, it is “difficult to form an idea” without having seen the documents, even if he adds that he does not doubt the good faith of the DGEQ.
There are several possible solutions and the documents could simply be redacted, when it comes to personal information, he continued.
However, Mr. Zanetti called for a concerted response from all parties, so that all agree on a common strategy.
The Parti Québécois (PQ), which has made this cause a hobby horse, has already assured that it has an entire “arsenal” to make the DGE bend and suggested the adoption of a law. In particular, he requests that a third party expert in law be able to examine the documents and decide what can be made public.
PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon expressed his impatience while the DGEQ has not moved since the adoption of the motion in June.
The result of the 1995 referendum on sovereignty was very close and the sovereignist camp has often accused its No adversaries of having circumvented the rules on spending in Quebec’s law on popular consultations. No to sovereignty won with 50.58% of support against 49.42% for the Yes camp.
At the Grenier commission, nearly a hundred testimonies and more than 4,500 documents were filed as evidence, but they are subject to an order of non-dissemination, non-communication and non-publication without time limits.
Retired judge Bernard Grenier justified his order by saying that he was sensitive to the warning expressed by some about the risk of damaging after several years the reputation of people who worked for the No cause in complete confidence. sincerity.
In a correspondence sent to elected officials a few weeks ago, the DGE indicated that he was facing an “impasse”. He recalled that the Grenier commission was not a real public inquiry commission like the Charbonneau commission.
The PQ maintains that Quebecers have the right to know what exactly happened in 1995.