I’m mad. At 93 years old, with all my head, all my heart, I make a gesture that I have never done, I am writing to you, [M. Lucien Bouchard]. We have already met. I am Alice Lévesque, born on August 17, 1928, six years after my brother René, who would have celebrated his centenary on August 24. I know how to be direct, you will forgive me.
I would have appreciated a lot more nuances from you during your interviews last week as honorary president of the “Lévesque Year”. Isn’t an honorary president supposed to honor the celebrated? Isn’t it supposed to relate his life, his work, his not so good shots, but above all the good ones? But what do we remember from your first words, Mr. Bouchard, as honorary president of the 100e René Lévesque’s birthday? Mainly your moods with regard to his party, yours too.
I know to what extent the Parti Québécois — created by my brother surrounded by proud people, who had Quebec tattooed on their hearts — mistreated all of its leaders. I know the internal dynamics with demanding members, who have surely enraged you more than once, hurt perhaps, as René did on many occasions. Is this a reason to depreciate this party as you do today?
While you describe the Parti Québécois as a “worn-out vehicle”, which “doesn’t deserve to go very well”, say that “it’s not strong”, that “it doesn’t click”, that “people don’t want it more”, and that “we’ll choose another one”, we hear you saddened by the fate reserved today for the Liberal Party. You say you hope for its rise, describe it as “a great party that has left a great heritage to Quebecers, because we need an ‘alternative'”. The Liberal Party must be reconstituted, according to you, because its weakness is not good for democracy.
I don’t understand why you didn’t put the same energy into defending the heritage of the Parti Québécois, which has accomplished great things for Quebec. Or to underline the resilience and strength of conviction of its members, who have supported for all these years, and despite the vagaries, the project of sovereignty – a project which, according to you, remains “a political necessity”. You could also have insisted on the role and importance of the Parti Québécois for democracy, in the run-up to elections that risk confirming the great domination of the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ). You could certainly have mentioned René’s questions about the longevity of parties, of all parties, but also recognized that the party he founded was able to mobilize a new generation of members and candidates who, without any opportunism, still believe in project to make Quebec a country. But, Mr. Bouchard, you did the opposite. You suggested that we will move forward with “another vehicle”, that it will be “perhaps with other words than sovereignty, separatism”.
Political parties go through cycles. Allow me this historical reminder. I experienced the death of your own party, the Bloc Québécois, in 2011, which had fallen over the years from 75 to 4 MPs. I celebrated its rise in 2019 with 32 deputies. You will also remember the Progressive Conservative Party in 1993, which fell from 151 to 2 elected, to regain power in 2006.
In this context, why condemn the Parti Québécois to death? Especially since the direction of the political vehicle which aims to lead the Quebec nation to its independence, as you know better than anyone, involves a high degree of difficulty, requires exceptional skill and imposes fierce periods of troubled waters.
In an interview, you were very harsh towards a Parti Québécois which proposes, if elected in 2022, to hold a referendum. It is, you said, “irresponsible”. It “lacks realism”. But aren’t you thus denouncing exactly what my brother René proposed, in 1970 and in 1973, committing himself to creating a country on the simple basis of the electoral result? Then in 1976, pledging to hold a referendum, when no poll gave majority sovereignty?
Too bad you are so hard when we inaugurate the statue of Jacques Parizeau, at the foot of which it is written “Don’t be afraid”. I am not a pure and hard, but we will not keep this option alive and the separatists mobilized by resignation and fearing a popular consultation on the question of Quebec independence. Why today condemn the whole party for this strategic element on which it is impossible to reach unanimity?
More than 27 years after the second referendum, neither you nor I know where history is headed. Who would have said, barely a few months ago, that the independence of Quebec, this taboo word, would be back in the news and that this would again embody, for many, the only valid option to finally allow Quebec to to assume one’s choices?
You have the right to no longer believe in the Parti Québécois of 2022, you have your reasons. You have the right to criticize him. But I was very saddened and shocked that you condemned the party of the one you are honoring this year, the party which always carries its option loud and clear. This party has suffered many blows in its history, I did not expect yours, so scathing.
You say that René had the meaning of words; you have it, too, Mr. Bouchard. You know the weight and scope of words, the weight and scope of the title of Premier of Quebec, and of the title of Honorary President of the 100e birthday of René Lévesque.
I have no doubt that you esteem René. I understand that you may have found it difficult to lead this demanding, extremely democratic party, in which the members do not hesitate to challenge their leader. I ask you, with all due respect, to show more rigor and balance in your assessment of a central element of René Lévesque’s legacy, namely the political vehicle he created, the Parti Québécois.