Since the founding of the Coalition avenir Québec, its conventions have always been an opportunity to sing the glory of François Legault. In reality, it has always looked more like a fan club than a political party.
From time to time, the delegates approve without questioning the orientations decreed by the chief. Whether in the Parti Québécois, at Québec solidaire or even in the Liberal Party of Quebec, we have periodically witnessed calls to order, even real revolts; at the CAQ, we bow down.
Normally, in a party, activists are driven by a certain number of principles and objectives to which they hold, whether this is sovereignty, the fight against inequalities or the defense of rights and freedoms. In the case of the CAQ, we don’t really know what motivates them, other than winning their elections.
Those who joined at the start were often neophytes, only too happy to be able to learn about politics without having to enlist in one or other of the camps that the national question had opposed for nearly a year. half century.
Caquiste autonomy could appear to them as a way of prudently sparing the Canadian goat and the Quebec cabbage, whereas it leads as surely to the triumph of federalism as bilingualism leads to Anglicization.
After more than ten years of existence, will the CAQ end up transforming itself into a real party or will it remain eternally this blissful creature of admiration before its founding father? We will have an idea in ten days, when Mr. Legault will have to submit to a vote of confidence, as provided for in the Constitution of the party during the first congress following the general elections.
Of course, no one imagines for a moment that Mr. Legault could have reason to worry. The question is rather whether the delegates are capable of having a minimum of critical sense.
On the same date last year, they had unanimously adopted a resolution demanding that Ottawa transfer to Quebec “all immigration powers as quickly as possible”, in accordance with what was provided for in the “New project for Quebec nationalists”, which had been imposed on them without consulting them in 2015.
The hour was serious. According to the Prime Minister, these powers were essential to prevent Quebec from becoming a new Louisiana. “I am asking, in the next election, for a strong mandate to go and negotiate this with the federal government. It’s a question of survival for our nation, ”he said, immediately triggering an ovation.
We know the rest. On October 3, Mr. Legault obtained the “strong mandate” he was asking for, but he ran into a wall in Ottawa. So much so that he ceased to claim these powers so crucial for the survival of the nation. Justin Trudeau and he even seem to have become the best friends in the world. Should we still give him a standing ovation?
CAQ activists may be used to approving everything without balking, but it’s a bit embarrassing to have to applaud a leader who continually does the opposite of what he says.
Like the vast majority of their fellow citizens, those of the greater Quebec City region have certainly swallowed the about-face on the third highway link, which has been their party’s flagship promise for nearly ten years.
According to a survey carried out on April 26 and 27 by the firm SOM on behalf of the Sun, only 29% of residents in the region are in favor of the tunnel project dedicated to public transit, as the government is now proposing without giving the slightest detail on its route, its cost or its timetable. On the south side of the river, the approval rate is just 12%.
If MPs and ministers in the region felt they had been used, what about the activists who also unwittingly helped mislead voters in their constituencies?
A vote of confidence can be an opportunity to send a message to the leader, as some have learned the hard way. At the 1996 PQ convention, activists who criticized Lucien Bouchard for his softness on the language issue inflicted a humiliation on him that almost convinced him to resign; Bernard Landry did it nine years later.
Of course, those who aspire to one day succeed Mr. Legault are not as eager to see him go as he himself was to replace Mr. Landry. However, it can be good to send the signal that no one is irreplaceable and, above all, that there are limits to making fun of the world.