The duty continues the editorial tradition by expressing its preferences for the October 3 elections. In respect of the freedom of conscience of our readers, we take this opportunity to recall our values and our principles.
In the 2018 elections, The duty could not find good reasons to support the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ). Our judgment on the place it would grant to public services was lapidary, the CAQ giving the impression of wanting to slash the public service and resume the Liberal fight for austerity. It was not the case.
François Legault will have surprised more than one by camping his action in a pragmatic respect for the social-democratic heritage of Quebec which would not have displeased a Bernard Landry. Taking advantage of a favorable situation due to the fiscal prudence of the previous Liberal government and the economic performance of Quebec, the CAQ government reinvested in the main social missions of the State. In the last four years, the budget for health has risen to 55.8 billion (an increase of 12.8 billion), that of education and higher education has risen to 29.3 billion (an increase of 6 billion) and that of culture rose to 1.8 billion (an increase of 600 million).
The overall state budget is $138.5 billion, up 25% since the election of François Legault. The full-time staff of the public service was nearly 61,300 positions in 2020-2021, or nearly 3,000 jobs more than at the start of his mandate. François Legault will have confounded the skeptics who were waiting for him as a degreaser of the welfare state to such an extent that we must look there, among the disappointed conservatives, for a large part of what explains the dazzling emergence of the Conservative Party of Quebec ( PCQ). Its leader, Éric Duhaime, conducted a campaign that was just respectful enough of democratic institutions to make his entry into the National Assembly acceptable, despite the obvious limits of his libertarian programme.
Conversely, Mr. Legault led a pitiful campaign, at the intersection of exasperation and blunders. His controversial remarks on identity issues and immigration are simplistic, to the point of hurting Quebecers who aspire to live together. They do not recognize themselves in the misleading and mean-spirited declarations of the outgoing Minister of Immigration, Jean Boulet, who made newcomers scapegoats in the challenges of integration.
The CAQ leader may well disavow his candidate. The fact remains that he participated in the construction in his ranks of a negative discourse on immigration, a mixture of insecurity, blame and reproaches moving us away from an ideal of an outstretched hand. The very real challenges of the francization of newcomers do not authorize the vengeful and victimizing discourses of our political elites.
Despite these deep reservations, we can entrust the keys of Quebec to François Legault for a second term. The experience of his team, his search for a balance between State interventionism and economic liberalism, his wise management of public finances, his desire for national affirmation as well as his benevolent management of the pandemic inspire confidence.
The pandemic has made him more humble, he said last week in an editorial interview with the To have to. The veneer of humility quickly cracks in him when his decisions are questioned. The bloodthirsty businessman quickly dismissed the criticism out of hand. For the virtues of humility to settle in his unconscious and for him to govern in the best interests of Quebecers, as he did during the pandemic, he will need a strong and determined opposition.
There is indeed a political formation, to the left of the left, to propose even greater state interventionism. During the campaign, the co-spokesperson for Québec solidaire (QS), Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, put the socialist training program in the broom closet, wanting to position itself more in the center left. The fact remains that QS’s proposals to tax the richest 5% of Quebecers, in their useful life and at death, have stalled his campaign with centrist voters.
Solidarity positions on taxation completely ignore the reality of Quebec taxpayers, who are already the most taxed in North America. Our journalists eloquently demonstrated the limits of QS analysis with their “Portrait of the ultra-rich near you”. Solidaires omit to say that Quebec already taxes accumulated wealth proportionally more than the average of developed countries. The wealthiest fifth of Quebecers also generates 70% of government income tax revenues.
It is a collective choice that we have made, imperative because of the historical and sociopolitical determinants of Quebec. Because of our size, our fragility and our exceptional cultural situation on an English-speaking continent, we cannot do without an interventionist state to create conditions conducive to our individual and collective development. There are, however, limits as to the place that the state should occupy in our lives and our wallets, which those in solidarity find difficult to admit.
All the same, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois ran the best campaign in terms of ideas, closely followed by Paul St-Pierre Plamondon in terms of dignity.
Québec solidaire, Quebec’s true left-wing conscience, has reached the maturity and rigor required to assume the role of official opposition. Mr. Nadeau-Dubois presents himself as the formidable antithesis of François Legault, and not only in terms of generational concerns. He is passionate about debate, where the other, man of action, finds the parliamentary game of an obvious sterility. Mr. Legault has never looked better than in a pandemic, when his decisions earned him the respect and consideration of a majority of the population, without suffering from questioning.
When it comes to the environment, Québec solidaire is in tune with voters for whom climate change is the issue of the day. Its environmental plan is the clearest, bravest and most ambitious of all the parties, followed very closely by that of the PQ.
The environment is indeed the Achilles heel of the CAQ, despite its commitments to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. Through its stubborn attachment to projects as senseless as the third link between Lévis and Quebec, the CAQ members fall into “climato-passivity”, to use Mr. Nadeau-Dubois’ expression. If Mr. Legault is serious in his intentions to make the fight against climate change a real national priority, he will have to follow through on his promise to collaborate “in good faith” with the opposition parties. As a gesture of openness, he could endorse the suggestion of Québec solidaire and convene a National Climate Summit.
For anyone still interested in the national question, the apprehended disappearance of the PQ would be a tragedy. Will the honest and respectable campaign led by Paul St-Pierre Plamondon be enough to save the party from the predicted shipwreck? We wish it with all our hearts. This year, the celebrations surrounding the centenary of René Lévesque remind us of the historic importance of the PQ in defending the Quebec nation, the French fact and the values of social justice. So many battles still dear to the PQ, a resolutely sovereignist party that deserves to live and rebuild itself in opposition… Until the day when, who knows, the only two sovereignist formations in the National Assembly, QS and the PQ, will be mature and lucid enough to put their differences aside and rebuild together the distant project of the country.
With the adoption of Bills 96 and 21, on the strengthening of French and secularism, the CAQ has established itself in the hearts of a majority of voters as the defender of Quebec identity and culture. These are not close to a contradiction. They consider themselves well represented by a reputable leader of federalism. François Legault thinks that the disappearance of the “old bickering” between federalists and sovereignists will open the door to progress for Quebec in its constitutional demands with Ottawa. This is the “good-willing” version of the beautiful risk. This simplistic reasoning cavalierly neglects the contribution of sovereignist parties to the National Assembly to maintain the vitality of the balance of power with Ottawa.
Paul St-Pierre Plamondon was right on target when the five chiefs went to Everybody talks about it, affirming that what is at stake in the election is to determine who will form the best opposition. At the time of the balance sheets, QS and the PQ form the most coherent and lucid opposition to keep an eye on the CAQ. There are candidates of great value within the Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ), but his hesitation and his reversals in the defense of French, so as not to alienate the Anglophone base of the party, disqualifies him from the outset. Despite all the determination of its leader, Dominique Anglade, the PLQ is unable to position itself as an alternative to a CAQ government, and that is because Ms.me Anglade has blown hot and cold over the past year on issues of language and identity.
Four years ago, Quebec voters maintained the organizational life of four political parties. There are now five, with the rise of the PCQ. We are behaving as if the proportional system is in force, while the first-past-the-post system will produce MPs elected with 30 to 40% of the vote on Monday, a scattering of the vote of the opposition parties, distortions and gnashing of teeth for which Mr. Legault will be primarily responsible.
By renouncing his commitment to reform the voting system, he sent the message to hundreds of thousands of Quebecers who will not vote for the CAQ that their voice is unworthy of representation. It is the worst service that we can render to a democracy in decline to padlock the expression of different voices in the National Assembly.
The adoption of a mixed proportional voting system is not a matter for intellectuals, as Mr. Legault claims. This is an issue of democratic representativeness of the first importance. We are counting on the opposition parties and civil society to remind the next government of this.