Let’s first note the difference.
• Read also: The meeting between Justin Trudeau and François Legault will take place on March 15
• Read also: Exceeding thresholds for family reunification: Quebec denounces a “direct affront” in its areas of jurisdiction
On the one hand, the Quebec government is going out of its way to make itself heard in Ottawa on immigration.
He writes in the Globe and Mail – as with Roxham Road. He writes to Justin Trudeau, personally. He brings out his guns – four ministers – to demand a billion dollars for asylum seekers.
Same cause, same consequence: Quebec asks, Ottawa says no. A fixed rule.
On the other hand, we don’t mess around. We execute. Immigration Minister Marc Miller, stalwart of the Trudeau government, is now acting without even warning the Quebec government.
The Legault government is not exemplary on family reunification issues? Marc Miller is there to impose his will accordingly: he will process excess family reunification requests.
Never mind your annual thresholds, your skills, our agreements.
Immigration referendum
The CAQ only responds by mouth. This time, the Trudeau government would “not respect the will of the Quebec nation.” And after?
So, what to do if the CAQ wants to change its proverbial balance of power with the federal government? There is this idea that is floating around: organizing a sectoral referendum to repatriate immigration powers to Quebec.
The PQ leader, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, relaunched it this week.
I say “relaunch” on purpose.
François Legault had already mentioned it during the 2022 election. It was at this same election that the PM asked for “a strong mandate” to obtain new powers in immigration. He got it, the “strong mandate”. The new powers, no.
So, what would Quebecers respond to a referendum to repatriate immigration powers? A Léger survey to the rescue.
First of all, there are more Quebecers (41%) who believe that it is up to the Quebec government to have exclusive powers over immigration rather than the federal government (35%).
And on the idea of the referendum, 42% would vote “yes”, while only 28% say they are in the “no” camp. A difference of 14%. If the CAQ organized this referendum, it would most likely win.
Now, it’s no secret: PM Legault doesn’t think about it when shaving in the morning. He is thinking about his reforms in health, in education, in Ontario.
It also carries out risk management in the face of the possible consequences of such a referendum. This could weaken his coalition.
We still arrive at the heart of the CAQ approach: is the third political way possible, or is it a sort of electoral accessory to please nationalist voters?
Constitutional fatalism
A constitutional fatalism has taken root in the Legault government. Either way, we’re going to lose, they seem to say.
However, doing nothing does not mean the status quo.
The Quebec government is on the defensive. Quebec’s political weight in Canada is diminishing, while the federal government expands its tentacles through multiple programs and intrusions.
The idea of a referendum would shake up the federal government.
Jacques Couture of the Lévesque government regained new immigration powers against Pierre Elliott Trudeau. He had the threat of independence in hand.
A few years later, it was Bourassa’s turn to do the same against Brian Mulroney. He had post-Meech up his sleeve.
With a referendum on immigration, PM Legault perhaps has a tool, allowing him to try to enforce what he has been promising to Quebecers for six years.
► Would you also like to respond to surveys? Register for LEO, the Léger panel: