The sparks usually go away without doing any damage, but you never know when one of them will start a fire.
In 1975, few would have bet that the struggle waged by the fledgling Association des gens de l’air would set Quebec on fire and pave the way to victory for the Parti Québécois (PQ), barely three years after the Liberals in Robert Bourassa had 102 deputies elected.
Air traffic controllers were not the only Francophones to be forced to use English at work, but their fight took on symbolic value and transcended partisan lines. In terms of language, federalists and sovereignists shared the same frustrations.
Requiring MPs to swear allegiance to the crown once every four years may seem like a bit of an outdated formality, which you can do with your nose covered, but there is a form of collective humiliation, to which Paul St-Pierre Plamondon simply echoed.
Prime Minister Legault would have every interest in finding an expeditious way to allow him to enter the National Assembly, as the leader of the PQ asked him to do.
It would be imprudent to hang around the three PQ MPs elected last October 3 until the adoption of a law that would exempt them from taking the oath to King Charles III. They certainly ask for nothing better than to become martyrs of Quebec democracy, flouted by the descendants of the conqueror.
If René Lévesque, Jacques Parizeau or Lucien Bouchard had undertaken a mandate by contesting the oath of allegiance to the queen, the outcry would have been immediate in English Canada, where attachment to the monarchy is however on the decline. We would inevitably have seen it as a separatist maneuver, while Mr. Legault now presents himself as a defender of Canadian unity.
In Quebec, public opinion would find it hard to understand the Prime Minister unduly letting things drag on. We would see there less the concern to respect constitutional provisions on which the jurists do not agree than a kind of pettiness towards a party which gives him bad conscience.
Finding itself out of Parliament would also provide the PQ with a visibility that it would not benefit from inside with only three deputies. Since the election, his challenge to the oath to the king has won him more than all the other opposition parties combined. The collective of artists who gave him their support could rapidly snowball.
In reality, Mr. Legault should thank Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon for giving him the opportunity to inexpensively demonstrate this autonomy that he has been drumming into our ears for years without ever materializing. Who knows, maybe it will give him the audacity to dare in other areas where he sticks to boasting.
If the collaboration of Québec solidaire (QS) in this affair seems acquired, that of the Liberal Party (PLQ) could be more embarrassing. Last June, the Liberals opposed the bill presented by QS which aimed to recognize the oath to the people of Quebec as the only one necessary for a deputy to take office.
PLQ spokesperson and MNA for LaFontaine, Marc Tanguay, maintained that the constitutionality of such a law would necessarily be challenged in court, which would lead to expenses that he deemed unjustifiable.
Above all, he saw a manifestation of “sovereigntist governance” in the support that the Legault government had given to this “gesture of rupture”, even if it had maneuvered to delay the examination of the bill until its adoption. becomes impossible before the dissolution of the National Assembly.
Of course, that was before the elections, the results of which vividly confirmed the total disconnection of the PLQ from the French-speaking majority. Enlightened by this crushing defeat, he may have discovered that exempting MPs from the oath to the crown is not only legally possible, but also desirable, and that this should not be seen as any rejection of the federal bond. .
Mr. Tanguay was not wrong, however, to think that the legality of the gesture could be challenged. Even if the Constitution does not provide for any sanction against a deputy who refuses to pledge allegiance to the king, its provisions lend themselves to various interpretations.
Someone in Canada will no doubt think that Quebecers should be reminded that they are still part of the federation, whether they like it or not, and that allegiance to the crown comes with equalization.