Prime Minister Legault said it bluntly: the creation of wealth is “the basis of everything”. What has driven him since he entered politics lies in this assertion. This in no way calls into question the priority he gives to education, nor the observation that health is “the greatest management challenge”. In his mind, everything is nevertheless conditioned by the economy.
We can certainly not blame him for having had to modify his plans during the first term because of the pandemic, but identity issues have also monopolized more time and energy than he would undoubtedly have liked.
Mr. Legault claims to still be at the head of a “nationalist government”, but the composition of his new cabinet indicates that he no longer intends to be distracted from what he believes to be the essential.
The highlight is undoubtedly the reconstitution of a superministry of the Economy for the benefit of Pierre Fitzgibbon. He may not combine Economics and Finance, as Bernard Landry once did, but his hold on Energy is just as decisive in the current circumstances.
The new committee on the economy and the energy transition that Mr. Legault himself will chair is intended to be an arbitration mechanism between the divergent views of his intrusive minister and the CEO of Hydro-Québec, but Mr. Fitzgibbon explained well how he sees things. “The ultimate goals must be taken into account,” he said. Knowing him, we can be sure that it is his own and that he will not hesitate to push anyone to reach them.
By removing responsibility for the language from Simon Jolin-Barrette, the Prime Minister signified that the file was definitively closed in his mind. Those who believe that Law 96 will not be enough to halt the decline of French hoped to find another attentive ear in Mr. Jolin-Barrette, perhaps too attentive to the taste of Mr. Legault.
The new minister responsible, Jean-François Roberge, has already declared that he is not in favor of extending the provisions of Law 101 to the college level. According to him, it is at the primary and secondary level that we must prevent anglicization.
He felt that “Law 96, as it is written at the moment, goes quite far”. However, a law can be applied with more or less rigor, and Mr. Roberge is naturally more flexible than his predecessor. This has its advantages, but sometimes the tastiest carrot cannot replace the stick.
It has been repeated ad nauseam that Christine Fréchette had left the cabinet of Jean-François Lisée, that is to say her position as minister responsible for the Metropolis, because she opposed the Charter of Quebec values of the Marois government. If that was not enough, Mr. Legault explained that it was necessary to understand from his appointment to Immigration that the integration of immigrants should be perceived as “a solution rather than a problem”. Better late than never.
The Prime Minister also felt the need to resuscitate the position of Minister responsible for Relations with English-speaking Quebecers, which Philippe Couillard had created in 2017 after initially refusing to do so. The English-speaking community may not be convinced by the assurance he gave them, in English, that their rights and the services offered in their language will be maintained, but Mr. Legault clearly felt the need to ease the tensions that the identity affirmation of the first term may have revived.
If the nationalism of his government is “non-negotiable”, he does not intend to poison relations with Ottawa either. If Sonia LeBel seemed to push goodwill a little far, replacing her with Simon Jolin-Barrette would have been perceived as a provocation, while the sovereignist past of Jean-François Roberge does not seem to have left more traces than that of
Mr. Legault himself.
Certainly, it is possible to walk while chewing gum. The first mandate demonstrated that federal-provincial disputes, like identity tensions, are not insurmountable obstacles to economic development, but that the creation of wealth generally appreciates tranquility.
The problem is that it is impossible to put the dynamics of Canadian federalism on hold while waiting for Quebec to catch up with Ontario in terms of wealth. The decline that French will have experienced by then will be irremediable, just like the demographic deficit that Quebec will have recorded compared to the rest of the country. Is the creation of wealth really
“the basis of everything”?