The weeks follow one another and are similar for François Legault. For a year, the CAQ record has been a succession of self-orchestrated blunders, to the great pleasure of opposition parties and commentators. Jacques Parizeau would have spoken of self-peel of bananaization. In the case of Mr. Legault, the term “caquastrophe” would perhaps be more appropriate.
The most recent concerns the solicitation of donations by elected officials from the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) in exchange for the opportunity to meet a minister during a fundraising activity. In other words, influence peddling by the party in power. Like in the good old days. It started with an MP. Then another. Then another one. The count is now at six, and those are just the ones we know about. To use an expression dear to the CAQ, it is systemic.
The amounts are not high since Quebec law limits individual contributions to $100. The problem is the method: monetizing access to ministers. And with nearly 90 deputies and around thirty ministers, it is not very difficult to multiply fundraising cocktails – sorry, “networking” – almost everywhere in Quebec.
A recent count indicated that nearly half of Quebec’s 1,138 mayors and prefects have felt obliged to give to the CAQ since 2021. (Not counting the thousands of municipal councilors…) For comparison, less than 1% of Quebecers make political donations in a given year.
Mayors have denounced the ploy, but at the same time feel that they do not have much choice, since the money for their project is often in the safe of a ministry. Needs are everywhere; the money is in Quebec.
Companies have also understood where their interest lies. In Rouyn-Noranda, 17 employees from the same construction firm participated in a cocktail party. It’s possible they all went to school with Minister Fitzgibbon. It’s more likely that they thought it would be good for business.
Quebecers believed that the Charbonneau commission had put an end to this type of practice. This shows that we should never underestimate the appetite of peddlers policies to monetize the benefits of power.
Friday, Mr. Legault announced that the CAQ was renouncing individual donations in order to “complete the work of René Lévesque”. As if the problem was popular funding or political commitment, and not monetizing ministers’ time. Fortunately, the CAQ is also the party that receives the largest amounts of public funding, by far. The maneuver was not very subtle.
François Legault must wake up at night thinking about the disastrous polls. After dominating the Quebec political landscape since 2018, the CAQ is now far in the rearview mirror of the Parti Québécois (PQ). Worse, the broken promise to change the voting method is coming back to bite the CAQ in the butt. If elections took place today, the CAQ delegation would be wiped out: the number of sky-blue elected officials would drop from 89 to around ten. This clearly affects the Prime Minister’s mood.
Last week, the camel’s back broke during a question in English. Mr. Legault punctuated his indignation with a rather unparliamentary term, which rarely comes out of the mouth of a prime minister. At least not in public. “ One thing I cannot accept is that we put in question my integrity. shit ! »
No translation was required. For political commentators, it was Christmas in January. Most of us laughed. English-speaking Quebecers even complimented Mr. Legault, and French speakers in general, on their use of colloquial expressions in the language of the other solitude. But the Prime Minister was not laughing.
François Legault has never taken well to being contradicted, even less to being criticized. In 2022, in the middle of the electoral debate, he grimaced every time an opponent made a comment to him. On televisions, the baboon in HD went poorly. However, Mr. Legault was assured of winning outright. Imagine his mood today, when he could spend the next three years contemplating the disintegration of his own party.
The CAQ is not an ordinary political party. It is an ultra-pragmatic – some would say business-oriented – coalition founded, built, and maintained around the personality of François Legault. At times, particularly during the height of the pandemic, it felt like a cult at times. The guru has lost his grip, and the followers understand that they have been somewhat fooled.
François Legault, who broke two solemn commitments – on the reform of the voting method, then on the third link – has surely taken note of this. But one thing still seems to escape him. When we constantly feel obliged to repeat that we are honest, perhaps it is time to stop being indignant, and instead to look in the mirror.