The Bloc members praised their leader, as well as the consensus, at the convention in Drummondville. The most contentious resolutions were discarded from the outset. Others did not have time to be debated in plenary. As a result, Bloc Québécois activists agreed on major principles that most of them already supported.
A party strategist opined, on the sidelines of the congress this weekend, that the independence movement has “mown up” and that it has become “more pragmatic”. In the corridors of the Drummondville conference center, the Bloc members – especially those who went through a few crises between 2014 and 2019 – barely hid their smiles to see that this year’s meeting did not give rise to any “psychodrama”.
The leader, Yves-François Blanchet, was entitled to the support of 97.25% of his militants, during his very first vote of confidence. In plenary on Sunday, only one resolution was rejected by delegates out of 121 considered.
There were still differences of opinion. Proposals relating to the union of separatist forces under the great Bloc tent or secularism have generated the most debate.
The Bloc has thus, again this year, debated the place to be given to the militants of various independence parties on the provincial scene.
While they refused to exclusively support the Parti Québécois (PQ), the Bloc delegates agreed to promise to “bring together separatists of all stripes” while recognizing the “historic and privileged ties that unite” the Bloc and the PQ. . However, a young militant, Félix-Antoine Breault, worried that this recognition would put off the militants of the late Option nationale and their desire to lend a hand to the Bloc. “It’s a wasted and easily recoverable potential,” he said, without convincing the majority.
Yves-François Blanchet refused to see this shared vote as uneasiness or heartbreak. The party has simply reiterated its historic position, he replied at a press briefing on Sunday.
A little later, the delegates ruled that their party should defend the positions of the majority in the National Assembly, and not only those of the government in place. “It would make it possible not to be obliged to support a government which wants a motorway tunnel which we do not want”, argued the activist Simon Marchand.
Secularism, with nuances
As for the debate on secularism, this too revealed slight disagreements. Activists have expressed concern over a resolution stipulating that the state “shall not recognize, pay or subsidize any cult” and that “only secularism protects [les valeurs progressistes et égalitaires] against dogma and religious fundamentalism”.
“If we use the word ‘cult’, we’re going to get hit on the head,” argued Florence Gosselin. It, too, the majority ignored.
A second proposal denouncing any attempt to prevent Quebec from establishing secularism and condemning the wearing of religious symbols by a person in a position of authority was also divided at the time of the vote.
The president of the Youth Forum, Rose Lessard, admitted to being uncomfortable with this part of the Quebec State Secularism Act. “Quebec is also everyone’s Quebec. And each person who wants to work can work with what he hears as signs”, she expressed to the Dutyas a personal opinion.
The general principle of secularism is not, however, debated among young Bloc members, she insisted. Mr. Blanchet did the same, in a press briefing afterwards. ” There is room [au Bloc] for all the debates, all the subjects, all the discussions”, he assured.
The immigration debate dodged
The proposals of the activists most likely to be talked about have, on the other hand, been rejected.
Those on immigration: its volume which should respect the reception capacity or irregular immigration “and those who use it in order to weaken Quebec”.
Two others, which stipulated that the lack of full powers in immigration by Quebec represents an “obstacle to social cohesion”, had been rejected on Saturday, in subcommittee.
Bloc MPs had strongly opposed it, at the microphone and behind the scenes, in discussion with delegates.
Yves-François Blanchet denied that a watchword had been given to avoid controversy. On the contrary, he summoned his deputies to leave the floor to the militants, insisted the leader.
Mr. Blanchet further rejected the idea that the delegates wanted to avoid plunging the Bloc into the same embarrassment as the Coalition avenir Québec, when Quebec Premier François Legault linked “national cohesion” to the decline of French and to non-francophone immigration.
His deputies, however, had confessed to wanting to dodge the same criticism.
Precedence in Quebec and judicial “excesses”
Apart from these brief debates, the Bloc members proceeded largely by consensus. They agreed to demand federal voting rights from the age of 16, to allow young people to be party members from the age of 14, to oppose positive “discrimination” in the granting of university research chairs, to campaign for the decriminalization of simple possession of drugs and for the abolition of the Senate.
All resolutions calling for Quebec laws and the Quebec environmental assessment process to take precedence over their federal counterparts were also passed. The protection of the French language was ardently defended.
On the other hand, the delegates ran out of time to decide on the idea that Quebec appoint all the federal judges on its territory or reject “the judicial excesses of the Supreme Court of Canada when they affect the exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec”.