When you find yourself in a situation as perilous as that of the Parti Québécois, you have to hold on to something. Thus Paul St-Pierre Plamondon welcomed the election of Pierre Poilievre as leader of the Conservative Party of Canada as good news for the sovereignist cause.
“I think it will exacerbate certain thoughts about our future,” explained the PQ leader. In his eyes, the libertarian vision of Mr. Poilievre and his unconditional support for the oil industry are simply irreconcilable with the values and interests of Quebec.
It is true that, during the race, the positions of the new Conservative leader startled many, whether it was his enthusiasm for cryptocurrency, his attacks on the Governor of the Bank of Canada or, more generally, his anti-statism in the poles apart from the ideals of the Quiet Revolution. In short, he has all the qualities of the perfect scarecrow.
It feels like rewatching an old movie.
When Stephen Harper became Prime Minister in 2006, it was also said that his arrival would be a real tonic for the independence project, already reinvigorated by the sponsorship scandal. His so-called “open federalism” would not be deceived for long. This dinosaur was finally going to make Quebecers understand that they had to leave this country as soon as possible.
None of this happened. Not only has the sovereigntist movement not progressed, but it has even regressed. Between the arrival of Mr. Harper and his departure in 2015, the Yes vote went from 50% to 40% in the polls. The ephemeral government of Pauline Marois appeared as a simple parenthesis due to the disgust caused by the revolting methods of financing of the PLQ.
In 2014, when Mr. Harper dared to take credit for this setback, sovereigntists cried arrogance. The leader of the Bloc Québécois, Mario Beaulieu, called these claims ridiculous. “I have some news for him; there will be a revival of the sovereignist movement, and he will have to swallow his words, ”predicted Pascal Bérubé. We are still waiting for this revival.
It is not possible to establish a correlation between the disaffection with sovereignty, which is due to many other factors, and the policies of the Harper government. Moreover, the decline continued after his departure. The fact remains that the announced shock of values did not occur. Although the Conservative Party’s Quebec hopes did not materialize, the public was not as horrified as had been feared (or hoped). Here as elsewhere, social democracy has seen better days.
However, we cannot say that the status of Quebec in the federation improved much during the Harper years. The motion passed in the House of Commons to recognize the existence of a Quebec nation “within a united Canada” was only symbolic; no new powers were transferred; and Québec’s representation at UNESCO is limited to one seat within the Canadian delegation.
Some initiatives of the Harper government have caused real irritation, such as the destruction of the gun registry or the strengthening of penalties for young offenders. His spats with Jean Charest over climate change were also frequent, but he generally refrained from encroaching on Quebec’s jurisdictions.
On a daily basis, many Quebecers already have the impression of living in a country distinct from Canada. Mr. Harper understood very well that they were prepared to maintain the federal link as long as they felt they were treated with a modicum of respect and that the rest of the country did not interfere too much in their affairs.
To hear his victory speech last Saturday, this is also the attitude that Pierre Poilievre intends to adopt. We must recognize its formidable efficiency. His marks of affection for the French language and of respect for the “Quebec nation” seemed very sincere. Discovering in his wife of Venezuelan origin a “little girl from Pointe-aux-Trembles” could only be a pleasant surprise.
Obviously, François Legault was not sure how he should welcome the new Conservative leader. The character appeared too disturbing during the race for the head of the CAQ to openly rejoice in his arrival and he was careful not to join his crusade against the wokebut he has to hope Eric Duhaime is right when he says he believes Mr. Poilievre is open to a transfer of new immigration powers.
Politics is often unpredictable. When Mr. Legault was in opposition, many saw him as a gravedigger of the “Quebec model”, of which he could well become a defender if Mr. Poilievre ever became Prime Minister of Canada. In the end, who will benefit from the scarecrow?