The simple fact that people are listening to the Parti Québécois (PQ) when it unveils its year 1 budget should rejoice. Not so long ago, the press conference would have ended in brief.
But what would be even better for the PQ is if we move on to something else in a few days. Because post-sovereignty budgets have never worked in its favor.
Its leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon (PSPP) sees it as an argument for independence. However, his calculations remain very hypothetical. We do not know in what year independence would occur or what the economic context would be. And above all, we don’t know what would happen with the federal government. The Supreme Court ruled that in the event of a Yes victory, Ottawa would have to negotiate. But no one can predict the outcome of these talks, for example, on debt sharing.
Pauline Marois has already said that independence would be followed by economic “turbulence”, before changing her mind to speak instead of “effervescence”. PSPP uses the example of Slovakia to suggest repercussions.
The case of Brexit, however, illustrates the monetary disadvantages. Of course, any comparison is imperfect. But at a minimum, this example shows the risk for the PQ of spending too much time on finances.
While the PQ has four MPs, this is all conjecture at best. That said, it would be wrong to criticize him for leading this exercise.
When the PQ do not talk about their option, their supporters accuse them of lacking courage, and their opponents see it as secrecy. But when they defend it, they are asked to take care of concrete issues like health and education. These two criticisms cannot be right at the same time…
The year 1 budget looks more like an obligatory passage.
Few people would like to become independent for their bank account. It is first and foremost a matter of the heart. We dream of a country because we feel profoundly different as Quebecers. Because we have the impression that his people are not free.
More often than not, the economy acts more as a brake. In 1980 and 1995, separatists hesitated to follow through on their convictions, for fear of losing money.
Beyond the figures, the year 1 budget simply serves to send them this message: don’t be afraid, it would be doable.
During the 1973 electoral campaign, at the request of René Lévesque, Jacques Parizeau presented the very first budget of year 1. It was an “educational tool to trivialize the fear of the unknown”, summarizes Pierre Godin in his biography of Mr. Lévesque.
Mr. Parizeau did not like the exercise. Instead of attacking the Liberal government’s record, he had to defend a document that was based on unverifiable hypotheses, alone against three adversaries.
But for now, the issue is elsewhere. It’s not about whether independence is feasible. It is rather whether it is desirable.
On the feasibility, the debate has been closed for a long time. “No one questions Quebec’s financial capacity [de se séparer] », declared Jean Charest in an interview with TV5 in 2005. Philippe Couillard repeated essentially the same thing in 2014.
Today, the liberals are happy with the return of the subject which ensured their political glory days. Except that another federalist leader is there. His name is François Legault and he repeats their memorable successes on the risks of loss of jobs and income.
At the PQ, we delight in seeing Mr. Legault contradict the heart of his former political commitment in such a direct manner. PSPP likes to recall that it took up the methodology used by Mr. Legault in his year 1 budget, in 2005 – a method which itself took up the logic of the work of the Bélanger-Campeau commission (1991).
The PQ compares Mr. Legault to Jean Charest, knowing that this enrages him. But even if he believes he is fundamentally right, what matters is knowing which option will be preferred by voters. And when Mr. Legault reads the polls, he feels on very comfortable ground.
At the last PQ congress, PSPP announced its plan in four stages: table a budget for year 1, propose an immigration policy distinct from that of Canada, table a document answering questions on the country project and define the Quebec citizenship.
The most important step, by far, is the third. It is inspired by the Scottish referendum, seen as a model of clarity and transparency. The Yes camp had published a comprehensive report.
PSPP also wishes to answer practical questions, such as the fate of farmers in a sovereign Quebec. In short, to talk about the why and the how, and not the how much.
This tedious work should be completed by the end of 2025. It should then occupy an important place in the campaign.
During its leadership race, PSPP committed to offering a consultation on independence, in a first mandate.
The year 1 budget is not the best electoral strategy of the PQ, as proven by the three postponements of the document, which was initially planned for 2022. But for the future, PSPP is committed to an already charted path. Whether we agree or not, this is a coherent approach. He is ready to pay the price for his beliefs.