“Stop playing Wonderland!” In the environment as in the economy or in health, the leader of the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ), François Legault, multiplied the attacks against the social project carried by Québec solidaire (QS), Thursday evening, in the second debate of the leaders of the election campaign.
Mr. Legault criticized at the first opportunity the Vision 2030 climate plan of aspiring Prime Minister Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois. If he finds his objective of reducing greenhouse gases “noble”, Mr. Legault fears “the impacts on the citizen” of his program. “I feel like it’s a bit like magic,” he said. It’s a bit like being in wonderland. »
The QS spokesperson asked the chief caquiste to “put away the Halloween decorations” and to “stop scaring people”. “We need unifying politicians who mobilize people, not people who discourage them,” argued Mr. Nadeau-Dubois.
“We are no longer in 1994,” he said of the CAQ’s Plan for a Green Economy.
Mr. Legault also found himself at the center of the crossfire when the question of studies on the validity of a third road link between Quebec and Lévis surfaced. “Who does the study, then how much does it cost? repeated the Conservative leader, Éric Duhaime, from one side of the stage. “I don’t know exactly how many,” replied Mr. Legault, on the other.
Mr. Duhaime asked Mr. Legault why the studies done on the project before the COVID-19 pandemic are, according to him, “outdated”, but not those carried out on the tramway project in Quebec. “They are also outdated because there are 30% fewer users on the buses in Quebec right now,” said Mr. Duhaime. “A big city like Quebec, we need a tramway,” retorted the Prime Minister.
CAQ-QS duel on the cost of living
Attacked by Mr. Legault, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois denied having environmental ambitions that would lead to the closure of businesses. He again criticized the CAQ leader for “scaring the world” and said that his program was limited to supporting companies in the hydrocarbons sector in their transition. “We are in 2022, these sectors will be transformed,” he said.
Mr. Legault again criticized his opponent’s “magic” tricks. He also attacked the plan of the leader of the Parti Québécois, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, who wants to tax the excess profits of oil companies. “If we tax the oil companies, they will pass that on to the consumer. How come he doesn’t understand that? he launched.
Mr. Duhaime took the opportunity to in turn attack Mr. Legault by stressing the importance of lowering gasoline taxes. “Why don’t you give a break to motorists? he asked.
Mr. Legault went on to say that he preferred to offer lump sums to offset inflation. “We prefer to give an amount of $400 to $600 and leave people free. Does freedom mean anything to you? he declared, taking up the Conservative leader’s leitmotif.
” Stirrer “
After accusing Éric Duhaime of having “fired in the boat” by opposing health measures during the first debate, François Legault pushed the attack even further. “How many elders were you willing to sacrifice?” […] Twice as many seniors? Three times as many seniors? he asked the Conservative leader, whom he called an “agitator”. Mr. Duhaime reacted by criticizing the government for having sacrificed young people. “You, you were irresponsible with the children of Quebec, Mr. Legault, never forget that! »
At a press conference after the debate, the CAQ leader said that Mr. Duhaime had “disqualified himself during the pandemic”.
Mr. Legault and Mr. Duhaime all the same found themselves in the same camp on the relevance of giving more room to the private sector in health. Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois then indicated that the private sector was already very present in the Quebec system, and that “if the private health sector worked, we would know”. To which Éric Duhaime replied that “if socialism worked in terms of health, we would know”.
The theme of health, on the other hand, gave rise to a rare consensus between the five leaders on the importance of offering maximum home care to seniors to allow them to stay at home as long as possible. “It happens that it is a model that is quite less expensive than seniors’ homes,” said Paul St-Pierre Plamondon on this subject, while Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois promised “a major national shift towards home care”.
Dominique Anglade, for her part, had to defend her promise to offer a family doctor to all Quebecers. ” Really ? Can we believe that? asked the host, Patrice Roy. “We have no right to let down a million Quebecers,” she retorted.
On the defensive, François Legault again criticized his opponents for pouring into magical thinking. “It takes three years to train nurses. We put in incentives but at some point, there is no one here who can do magic.
Act again on French?
Mme Anglade prided herself on having led the “only party” in the National Assembly that opposed both the adoption of Bill 21 (Secularism of the Quebec State) and Bill 96 (Act respecting the official and common language of Quebec, French), and this, “on questions of values”.
She criticizes the CAQ government for having “taken away rights” from English-speaking Quebecers and immigrants, especially with Bill 96.
“You agreed with the bill at the start, that’s the problem,” noted Éric Duhaime, who openly courts the Anglophone vote.
That said, the Liberal leader insisted on the need to “act on French”. In his eyes, we must “ensure that in downtown Montreal, we have clear measures to support our businesses and our businesses”.
Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon reiterated his promise to extend the Charter of the French language to CEGEPs since, according to him, the effect of Bill 96 will be at best “placebo”. The CAQ leader flatly refused to expand the scope of Bill 101 to college studies. “That’s not the key,” said the “little guy from Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue […] became Prime Minister”, before adding: “The key is the integration of newcomers into French, not prohibiting, as Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon wants to do, Francophones from going to perfect their English in a English Cegep. »
It was enough for “PSPP” to describe Mr. Legault as a “climate skeptic of the language”.
Ms. Anglade became animated when it was a question of whether the sovereignist project is still relevant. In front of Mr. Legault, who refused to say whether he would vote yes to a possible referendum, the Liberal leader hastened to point out that, according to her, her party is the only one to be clearly federalist, unlike her opponents.
“That would be yes to my left [avec le PQ]it would be yes with Québec solidaire, it would be maybe with the Conservative Party and it might be with Mr. Legault, ”she said.
Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon also jumped at the chance to warn the sovereignists against Mr. Legault. “Your project is to put an end to the sovereignist project,” he told the CAQ leader.
Four-year-old kindergartens in the spotlight
On the theme of education and services to citizens, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois criticized François Legault for having “prioritized” the bad files. “You have put the pedal to the metal for four-year-old kindergarten. […] During this time, the waiting list for CPEs has increased under your leadership,” he said.
“It looks strangely like the seniors’ home,” mocked Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon. “It’s true, that!” continued Mr. Nadeau-Dubois.
Mr. Legault accused his four opponents of being “against” his four-year-old kindergarten model. “Why are you against it? It exists in the Scandinavian countries, you know them well, ”he asked the PQ leader, who studied in Sweden and Denmark.
For her part, Dominique Anglade proposed making access to daycare services a right, like the right to education. “It would not occur to us to have a child who is seven years old, who goes to school, and we say to him: no, you will wait two years because we have no place” , she illustrated.
During the last term, women who were unable to return to work due to a lack of childcare places for their children experienced “a significant setback”, lamented Ms.me England. “It’s the opposite,” retorted François Legault, cutting off his opponent. In turn, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon and Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois urged Mr. Legault to let the Liberal leader finish her remarks.
In terms of form, the second debate turned out to be much less cacophonous than the first, with the leaders all showing themselves to be more disciplined and clear, without the exchanges lacking in bite. After two hours filled with countless promises, the finale brought the chefs back to basics when Patrice Roy asked them what their “biggest worry for the next four years” was.
First to answer, François Legault spoke of “green economy”, of “reducing GHGs and creating wealth”. Dominique Anglade, said that it was necessary to have a vision for the fight against climate change and to “adjust” the shortage of manpower. Paul St-Pierre Plamondon was the only one to speak of “French” in addition to the environment. Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois maintained that it was first necessary to fight against climate change and offer a way out of the inflation crisis. For his part, Éric Duhaime stuck to a single theme: the purchasing power of Quebec families.