1er February 2022. Chief Opposition Whip Filomena Rotiroti bursts into Liberal Leader Dominique Anglade’s office behind a large bouquet of flowers. “It’s from your caucus, my dear leader. We love you very much,” she said, while specifying that the demonstration of affection was not programmed to coincide with the passage of the To have to.
Nine months later, the Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ) is in turmoil. The historic defeat of October 3, followed by the exclusion of MP Marie-Claude Nichols from caucus three weeks later plunged Dominique Anglade into an unparalleled leadership crisis.
Some timid support for the leader has been heard, but the statements of former ministers and politicians demanding his departure, they are multiplying.
Former Liberal strategist Luc Ouellet says that relations have been “more difficult and less frequent” between the leadership and the authorities of the PLQ in recent years.
“This crisis comes from the fact that the party, in my opinion, has not recovered from the departure of Jean Charest”, supports the partner at the National public relations firm. The one who was premier of Quebec from 2003 to 2012 was “omnipresent” with the authorities of the party, he says. “He worked a lot with the team in place, both in the organization and in the executive. »
Mr. Charest was known for taking care of “everyone, [c’est-à-dire de] all forms of power within the party,” adds Mireille Lalancette, full professor of social communication at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières.
Philippe Couillard, for his part, was “a good prime minister” from 2014 to 2018, but a bad party leader, according to Mr. Ouellet. “Mr. Couillard is a man who wanted to lead Quebec. But party meetings with the executive are not something that interested him, ”said the former liberal strategist.
However, having good relations with the executive council and the presidents of liberal associations allows the leader to be supported “in the hard knocks”, explains Luc Ouellet. Dominique Anglade somehow inherited a party “not necessarily healthy,” he says.
If the 48-year-old politician was more concerned with party authorities than Mr. Couillard, “she did not necessarily have time to put everything in place” with them, according to him. “She focused her efforts on preparing for the campaign [électorale]. »
Earlier this week, M.me Anglade failed to convince MP Marie-Claude Nichols to sit down with him in the official opposition after having excluded her on October 27th. The elected representative of Vaudreuil had refused transport-related files within the Liberal shadow cabinet. The chef suffered a shower of criticism following this imbroglio. “Unfortunately, we see more people who don’t support her than people who support her,” says Mr. Ouellet bluntly.
Politics is not a business, but “a management of personalities”, recalls the former liberal apparatchik Ronald Poupart in an interview with The duty. He gives the example of his former leader Robert Bourassa, who led the Quebec government from 1970 to 1976 and from 1985 to 1994. “You have to remember that you have a personality in front of you. Robert Bourassa, if there was an obstacle in front of him, he did everything to solve the problem without there being a crisis. »
A disunited party
In the wake of the ejection of Mme Nichols of the caucus, former elected Liberals, such as Nicole Ménard and Lucie Charlebois – who were part of the governments of Jean Charest and Philippe Couillard – have called loud and clear for the departure of Dominique Anglade. Others sharply criticized his leadership.
These public outings prove “that there is no unity in the party and that there is no party discipline,” says Professor Lalancette. Usually, we don’t speak against the leader. She finds it surprising to see these dissensions, when the PLQ has always “provided a very, very united image”.
According to Ronald Poupart, the chef has difficulty with the “old-timers of the Charest era”. “It was already crawling under Mr. Couillard,” he points out. The party remained divided, especially inside the caucus. Mme Anglade inherited that. She was not able to reunite the party and it remained divided. »
Currently, M.me Anglade must be “in action” and explain his vision to liberal activists, advances Luc Ouellet. “If I were her, I would be omnipresent, I would summon the party authorities, the regional presidents. I would make those people proud again. »
The historically low election results of the PLQ have “shaken” the party, says Mr. Ouellet. On October 3, the party won only 21 seats, 10 less than in 2018. Following the exclusion of Mme Nichols from the caucus, the party now has 20 elected members under its banner in the National Assembly. And Dominique Anglade must submit his leadership to a vote of confidence at the party congress by November 2023.
Until then, the members of the PLQ must stand behind their leader, argues Mr. Ouellet. Replacing it at this time would be “a strategic mistake”. “It’s easy to say, ‘We’re changing! Mme Anglade, go home!” But who do we put tomorrow morning at the head of the party? he asks himself.
For Mireille Lalancette, however, “if the party is no longer functional and must be reviewed from top to bottom”, the solution may be to change the person at the head. Within the “major parties” like the PLQ, the leaders defeated in the elections “remain little or not in office”, she underlines.
Leaders who do not lead their party to victory
Dominique Anglade is not the only one to have faced adversity within her own troops.
Elected leader of the Liberal Party in 1950, Georges-Émile Lapalme was shaken by his crushing defeats in the 1952 and 1956 elections, both won by the Union Nationale of Maurice Duplessis. Broken, the politician falls ill to the point of missing the first session of the new Parliament. “We wanted his head at all costs and we criticized him extremely severely in relation to the organization of his electoral campaign”, says Ronald Poupart.
Back in Parliament, Mr. Lapalme tried to establish his authority by expelling the “black sheep” from his caucus, Lionel-Alfred Ross (Montréal-Verdun) and Dave Rochon (Montréal–Saint-Louis), whom he accused of maintain close relations with the Unionist adversary. “They were suggested to resign before they were kicked out,” writes the parliamentary correspondent of the To have to of the time, Pierre Laporte.
The purge was insufficient, and Georges-Émile Lapalme gave up running for his own succession as the Liberal convention of May 1958 approached. has known only dark days,” reads The duty the next day. Before handing over to Jean Lesage, the ousted leader warned Liberal supporters of the risk of being “vomited by the electorate”. The party must “regenerate or disappear”, says this precursor of the Quiet Revolution when leaving the stage.
Claude Ryan also lowered his flag before the convention held to consolidate his leadership in the summer of 1982. Ronald Poupart remembers: “Everyone wanted his head the day after his electoral defeat in 1981. The Liberal MP for Charlevoix, Raymond Mailloux, was the first to say it publicly, but it frolicked everywhere across Quebec. »
The image makers of a public relations firm hired at the last minute did not allow the author of the beige book, which supported his vision of federalism, to turn the corner. “What we’re going through right now with Dominique Anglade has already happened. It’s just that we forgot everything,” concludes Mr. Poupart.
When Claude Ryan’s resignation was announced, the editorialist of the To have to Gilles Lesage observes the influence of Anglophone MPs on the Liberal caucus: “They alienate Francophones, especially young people, whose contribution is essential for the PLQ to aspire one day to regain power. “It will be necessary to wait for the return of the tightrope walker Robert Bourassa so that the “reds” resume the path of victory.
The PLQ is again “at a crossroads”, says Mireille Lalancette. He has four years to “reposition himself on the political spectrum,” concludes Luc Ouellet.
With Marco Bélair-Cirino and Alexandre Robillard