Last February, delegates to the QS general council overwhelmingly rejected a resolution which deplored the absence of independence in the solidarity discourse during the electoral campaign the previous fall.
It is true that the by-election in Saint-Henri–Sainte-Anne was going to be held three weeks later and it was generally agreed that it was not an issue likely to favor the victory of Guillaume Cliche-Rivard.
The day after the election, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon strongly criticized QS for having led “a more liberal campaign than the Liberals” by completely eliminating independence, even if it was officially part of the party’s program.
It is true that the PQ did exactly the same thing, for the same reasons and with the same success during the recent by-election in Jean-Talon, once again postponing the publication of its year 1 budget for a year. Sovereign Quebec. This time, it was Prime Minister Legault who criticized him for hiding the first article of his program.
In any case, and since there is no election in sight, we now seem more inclined to talk about independence at QS, where the three candidates for the position of female spokesperson have chosen to do so. an issue. However, they give the impression of being less eager to promote it than to attack the PQ, whose spectacular victory in Jean-Talon cut short QS’s claims to embody another option against the Legault government.
Last Monday, during the first of two debates planned between now and the convention at the end of November, the member for Sherbrooke, Christine Labrie, explained that independence was not the reason which had encouraged her to join the ranks of QS and that it was still not the priority in his eyes.
His former colleague from Rouyn-Noranda-Témiscamingue, Émilise Lessard-Therrien, seemed especially interested in the “sovereignty of the regions”, where the centralization of powers in Quebec would seem even heavier than the encroachments of Ottawa. Only Ruba Ghazal (Mercier) had indicated upon entering the race that independence would be her main priority.
The three candidates sang in unison the refrain on the “divisive approach” and “the closed independence of the PQ”, as opposed to the “unifying” and “inclusive” speech of QS. The PQ bashing has become an imposed figure in QS gatherings. Although we know it, the intensity of the hostility of activists towards the PQ always surprises. Animosity is also present in the other camp, but it does not reach the same degree of hatred.
Despite everything, the sovereignists seem more seduced by the PQ discourse. It is true that the process of gaining independence proposed by QS, which provides for the election of a constituent assembly, a prelude to a referendum on a draft constitution, leaves many skeptical, but this is undoubtedly not the case. not the main problem.
In its report published last week, the PLQ revival committee explained that it had disconnected itself from the French-speaking majority by not having been sufficiently attentive to their identity concerns. The same causes generally have the same effects. In its desire for inclusion at all costs, QS also tends to neglect this insecurity.
It took time for the PLQ to admit that its expulsion from the regions was not simply a question of centralization that could be resolved by the adoption of a “Charter of the Regions”. It was rather that the French speakers who live there no longer recognized themselves in him.
Mme Ghazal said she was encouraged by a poll conducted at the end of September by the new firm Pallas Data, based in Toronto, according to which 43% of 18-34 year olds and 56% of solidarity voters would vote yes.
These figures contrast sharply with the results obtained by Léger barely a month earlier with a sample of the same size. The percentage of those in favor of yes was more like 40% and that of 18-34 year olds, 31%. Such a pronounced discrepancy far exceeds the usual margin of error.
Everyone was surprised by Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois’ loud questions about his political future. We can very well understand that he would one day want to do something else in life. Before spending 25 years in politics, François Legault had already had time to build a company that is the pride of Quebec.
It is also possible that he is beginning to realize the limits of solidarity discourse, despite all his generosity.