[Chronique de Michel David] The departure of Véronique Hivon, a loss of soul

Elected for the first time in 2008, Véronique Hivon did not belong to the great era of the PQ. She only played a secondary role in the short-lived government of Pauline Marois and declined all invitations to seek the leadership.

The MNA for Joliette was nevertheless the soul of the PQ, of which she magnificently embodied the humanist values ​​that presided over its founding. Independence, of course, but also a more generous idea of ​​Quebec. Many will no doubt see in his departure the signal that it is time to turn the page.

His contribution to the adoption of the law on medical assistance in dying and the creation of specialized courts for cases of sexual assault is praised with good reason. Rarely have we seen an elected representative have such an ability to rise above party lines while being able to offer a vigorous opposition.

However, a member is not elected for the role, however useful, that she could play in opposition. First and foremost, a government is chosen, and unfortunately Quebeckers no longer see the PQ forming it.

Despite their regret at seeing Mme Hivon, the voters of Joliette will perhaps be relieved not to find themselves faced with the obligation to choose between an MP they loved and the government they want. She will have spared them this dilemma.

Even if she had been re-elected, a deputy more or less would not have changed much as the situation of the PQ seems desperate. Pascal Bérubé, who seems impregnable in his stronghold of Matane, could well be the last of the Mohicans.

We can very well understand that after devoting most of her working life to politics, the MP for Joliette wants to regain some normalcy. She assures that the disastrous polls for the PQ did not influence her decision in any way, but seeing her dream vanish could only weaken the motivation of this convinced separatist.

Even more than the charisma and competence of its leaders, the strength and greatness of the PQ resided first and foremost in the fervor of its activists, driven by the same dream that has continued to recede since 1995.

During the difficult times of recent years, Véronique Hivon’s commitment has undoubtedly been a source of inspiration for many. Seeing her go, they might in turn wonder if chasing what is looking more and more like a mirage is worth putting the best of themselves into it. It is perhaps in this that his departure will be the most damaging.

Many sovereignists who joined the CAQ over the years wanted to be pragmatic, like François Legault. Since the “winning conditions” were not met, it was a question of preserving the future by preventing dissolution in the great Canadian whole.

The danger is to be satisfied with small defensive victories, presented as so many objects of “pride”, which in reality only delay the deadline. Without a dream come true, someone has to keep it alive. Who could still do it, if not the PQ?

The results of the latest Léger poll, which suggest a Caquist sweep on October 3, give the full measure of the denial of the solemn promise that was the reform of the voting system.

The 44% of voting intentions with which the CAQ is credited is not exceptional: it is the percentage obtained by the PQ in 1994, and less than what the PLQ obtained in 2003. The difference is that the first had won 77 seats, and the second, 76, while the CAQ could approach a hundred.

In both cases, the official opposition had elected at least 45 members. This time, she could have barely twenty, or even less. Even when Robert Bourassa won 55% of the vote in 1985, the PQ had 23 MPs.

All of this bodes ill for parliamentary democracy. With 76 elected officials, the Legault government is already showing worrying signs of arrogance. And this situation is not likely to improve.

The departure of Véronique Hivon was an opportunity for citizens to rejoice in these moments when the National Assembly was able to put partisanship aside in the name of the common good. Such collaboration is likely to be more difficult if the announced sweep materializes. A party in a quasi-monopoly position always tends to confuse the public interest with its own.

To see in video


source site-45

Latest