Diplomatic missions are said to be run like clockwork. Upon his arrival, the Prime Minister only has to follow the score, take care of his personal relations with his counterparts and enjoy small pleasures such as being received at the Élysée.
But since his arrival in France, François Legault has followed a fairly jazzy score, experimental category.
During his visit to the Alstom factory, he wondered aloud about the contract signed in 2023 for the tramway in Quebec. “Legally, it is not clear whether or not we should go back to tender,” he said.
Alstom was the only bidder. The German company Siemens had withdrawn. However, she indicated Thursday to Sun not wanting to challenge the contract. Relaunching a call for tenders would increase delays, and probably costs. Difficult to see how this would help a government that wants to carry out the project. This would be all the more risky since the probable next Prime Minister of Canada, Pierre Poilievre, refuses to “put a penny” in the tramway.
In France, Mr. Legault is being followed by immigration because of his declarations made before his departure. Journalists ask him to clarify his ideas. A certain fog remains. Its solutions still stand out for the roundness of their corners.
The Prime Minister proposed drawing inspiration from the French model, where reception stations are set up to welcome asylum seekers, offer them services, process their files and distribute them throughout the territory.
Mr. Legault is asking the federal government to force half of the asylum seekers in Quebec to move to another province.
This poses two problems.
First, no law allows it. Everything indicates that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms would prohibit it. This was also specified in a document submitted this summer by the federal government to the provinces.
Then, distribution is more difficult to do once asylum seekers have settled.
We can design a system that distributes them when they arrive. Germany and Switzerland do it. And like Canada, they are federations. In their service center, they issue work permits limited to a region of the country.
However, it would be much more complicated to force individuals to leave Quebec after they have settled there. How would this system work? It is up to the Trudeau government to sort out the details, replied Mr. Legault. Indeed, this is a federal matter.
Still, it would be better to check whether an idea is applicable before proposing it.
The CAQ’s descent in the polls began last year because of the third Quebec-Lévis road link. The project has become a symbol of a certain improvisation. The government often changed its mind and rigor seemed to be a secondary consideration.
The same thing could happen again with immigration.
In 2022, Mr. Legault requested a strong mandate to repatriate federal powers. Despite his landslide victory, nothing has changed. He reacted by threatening, without much conviction, to hold a sectoral referendum.
He then demanded from the federal government a rapid reduction in temporary workers, without however doing so himself. Its plan currently boils down to a six-month pilot project in Montreal which would affect barely 3,000 people.
The gap is striking between the seriousness of his diagnosis and the timidity of his measures.
Mr. Legault has given himself two missions: to mobilize the population in the face of the challenges posed by immigration, then to act.
For the first part, he succeeded. All parties in the National Assembly recognize that temporary immigration now exceeds Quebec’s reception capacity. Even the Trudeau government has changed its position – its conversion, however, results more from the impact on housing which worries English Canada.
In this issue, it is too easy to limit ourselves to moral rhetoric and the defense of individual rights. For example, in the last election, the Liberals wanted to create a “right” for every child to obtain a place in daycare. Indeed, we all want it. But it’s more of a wish than a plan.
Asylum seekers create an additional demand for 7,000 daycare places. We would have to build 100 establishments and hire 900 educators, even though there is already a shortage of them. Remember that according to the latest figures available, no less than 35,000 children were registered on the waiting list.
We can judge that Mr. Legault lacks delicacy or empathy when he talks about immigration. But he nevertheless succeeded in his objective of putting it at the heart of the debate.
The danger for him is that he has only done half the job.
He brandishes a threat for the future of the nation, denounces the federal government and then comes up with fluctuating proposals of varying applicability. He is better at talking about the problem than at convincing with his solutions.
Mr. Legault’s impatience is understandable – for asylum requests, he can only beg in Ottawa. But the PQ will respond that this proves that we cannot expect anything from the federal government.
As with the third link, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon takes advantage of it. Mr. Legault repeats that the nation would be in danger. All he has to do is say: I have a real plan!
If nothing changes, Mr. Legault could regret having messed around so much with immigration.