(Montreal) “This government is far too powerful compared to the number of votes it actually obtained. It’s too much. »
It is in the calm and composed tone that she is known for that Françoise David makes this judgment without complacency, which is not so much aimed at the government of François Legault itself as at the voting method which gave him this power and his refusal to reform it despite its promises to do so.
In a candid interview with La Presse Canadienne, the co-founder of Québec solidaire and former member of parliament for Gouin does not hide her disappointment at the distortion of the 2022 election where the Coalition Avenir Québec obtained nearly three-quarters of the seats in the National Assembly with a minority of votes. “Don’t forget that this total of 90 deputies (out of 125) was obtained with 41% of the votes. And with 41% of the vote, they have incalculable power. It makes no sense, because the other almost 60% of people are very poorly represented. That’s the voting method we have. »
180 degree turn
Françoise David left the New Democracy Movement – which campaigns for reform of the voting system – last February after working there for four years, but the cause is still close to her heart. One of the biggest criticisms she makes of the CAQ government, even if there are others, is its 180-degree turn on the reform of the voting system.
François Legault made this a flagship promise during the 2018 electoral campaign following a solemn commitment, made in the previous months with the Parti Québécois and Québec solidaire, while the CAQ was still in opposition. Bill 39 providing for a reform of the voting system, presented by his government in 2019, finally died on the order paper.
PHOTO JACQUES BOISSINOT, THE CANADIAN PRESS
François Legault
“What is even more frustrating is that Mr. Legault had tabled a bill and we had the start of a parliamentary committee, the part where we carry out consultations, so around forty groups, experts, etc. ., who came. It was very far away. That’s the furthest we’ve ever gone,” sighs Mme David.
Even if she readily acknowledges that this reform may have been put aside during the pandemic, she still has not digested what comes next. “When they pulled the ‘plogue,’ there was no reason. None. In fact they didn’t even give any. They simply said that it was a reform that only interested a handful of intellectuals. “That’s Mr. Legault,” she complains.
“Big rubbish”
“It’s false, it’s fallacious, it’s complete nonsense. It’s like the third link. We make one, we no longer make one because we don’t need it, but in the end, we could perhaps make one. It makes no sense.
“It is in these moments that this government disappoints me the most,” she continues without ever raising her voice. A government that assumes responsibility, left, center or right, ultimately you say “ok, the people elected him and they knew what they were electing him for”. But a government that is incapable of taking responsibility for its ideas is discouraging,” she adds.
In return, she specifies, the absolute power held by the CAQ lifts the veil on its true nature. “Obviously, that suits Mr. Legault. What I find a little dramatic is that here we see the true face of the CAQ emerging: neo-liberal, relatively socially conservative, not wanting to ask the richest of our population to contribute more, especially not, especially not,” she lets fall.
Good grades despite everything
However, it would be a poor understanding of Françoise David to imagine her locked into all-out partisanship. She readily admits, for example, that the CAQ pleasantly surprised her during the health crisis.
“When the pandemic arrived, it’s true that Mr. Legault surprised because he adopted a certain number of measures – I’m thinking of women victims of violence among others. There was real awareness as the problem grew. Shelters, CALACS and all have had budget increases. Something happened on this issue.
PHOTO DOMINICK GRAVEL, LA PRESSE ARCHIVES
Françoise David
“We could see that there was a desire, yes, to work for people. We may not agree with all the measures that were taken, but we felt this desire. In my opinion, that’s why he was re-elected,” she analyzes.
However, she has a lot of difficulty with her identity reflexes, in particular with Law 21 on secularism or with certain elements of Law 96 on the protection of French. “There is some good, but there are also problems such as, for example, requiring that after six months, any immigrant be able to understand what the Ministry of Revenue says to them in French, which is ridiculous and everyone knows it won’t happen. »
FFQ: “I have hope”
She takes this same balanced view of the Fédération des femmes du Québec (FFQ), recognizing that the massive membership of women at the time she was president has seriously eroded in recent years due to significant internal differences. and very public motivated by different causes in which many women say they no longer recognize themselves.
However, she points out that these movements are cyclical. “The Women’s Federation, before my arrival and that of the team with whom I worked, was not going through a prosperous period. Not many people remember it, but it had lost a third of its limbs. We put all that back in place by mobilizing women with the Bread and Roses March of 1995 and that’s how we managed to find each other, to come together, to talk to each other. »
Françoise David notes that “the difficulty for, I don’t know, ten years, is that there are a lot of differences and perhaps difficulty in coming together on common themes”. Despite everything, she says, “for two or three years – and I have had the opportunity to meet the new presidents – I feel a desire to seek out members, to have perhaps more friendly discussions, while continuing to represent all women, including those from minorities.”
“So I have hope. It’s not an easy situation, I agree, but I have hope. »
Always involved
We met Mme David while she participated in a Québec solidaire press conference calling for stronger protection measures for senior tenants. With her lively gaze and clear words at the age of 75, she smiles when we ask her why she is coming out of retirement. “Retirement is relative. Retirement means no longer having to get up in the morning to go to work, but I’ve been involved in all kinds of things since I retired. »
His involvement cannot be denied, as his years with the New Democracy Movement indicate. “Now what I do is at a slower pace, obviously, than before I retired. It’s a lot to support causes, but I don’t initiate anything. It doesn’t belong to me anymore. There are young people, they are good. »
She is always ready to sign letters, support causes that are dear to her or to write texts “which, sometimes, I send to newspapers which are kind enough to publish them”.
And she continues to make her voice heard behind the scenes, she admits. “When I have ideas, I sometimes call people. Then they do what they want with my idea. »