The PLQ has always seemed to see the protection of French as a threatening enterprise for Canadian unity. During the debate on the adoption of Bill 101 in 1977, its interim leader, Gérard D. Levesque, described it as a “separatist law.”
However, it was Robert Bourassa who, with Bill 22, had made French the official language of Quebec, but the Liberals held it mainly responsible for the rise of the PQ and their own defeat in 1976. From then on, any new measure protection of French has become suspect to them, as if it was part of a plan whose independence was the real objective. Even when it is presented by the CAQ.
Failing to defend French in Quebec, the Liberals are always ready to promote it elsewhere in the country, arguing that the more space it takes up there, the more influence Quebec will have within the federation, regardless of whether its demographic weight is decreasing.
In an open letter sent to The Canadian Press, the current interim leader of the PLQ, Marc Tanguay, says he wants to make Quebec the “flagship of the Canadian Francophonie”. However, it is very difficult to take seriously its objective of a proportion of 50% of Canadians able to speak French by 2050. Unless the ability to say Hello/Hi does not appear to him to have a sufficient level of bilingualism. It’s one thing to show solidarity with the fight of French-speakers outside Quebec, it’s another to deny the reality of Canada.
*****
Mr. Tanguay is right to say that this concern for French-speakers outside Quebec is part of the DNA of the PLQ. It has become even more pronounced since the double failure of Meech and Charlottetown convinced him that the role of big brother was all he could aspire to.
Returning to the time when Quebec was the capital of French Canadians was already at the heart of the report published in 2001 by the committee chaired by former minister Benoît Pelletier. Since the expression “flagship” was associated with the PQ, the report spoke instead of the “main home of the Francophonie in Canada.”
However, the idea was the same: “We must develop a program which aims to consolidate the place occupied by the entire Canadian Francophonie at the center of the values which are fundamental for the future of our federative bond. » In other words, Quebec had to take into account the fate of French-speakers outside Quebec in its reflection on its political future.
Mr. Pelletier deplored the “brutal rupture” that occurred in 1967 during the Estates General of French Canada, which marked the transition from French-Canadian nationalism to Quebec nationalism. The gap has widened further with the intensification of the constitutional debate. During the 1995 referendum campaign, many sovereignists were angry with the Federation of Francophone and Acadian Communities for having accepted a $500,000 grant from the federal government to extol the merits of linguistic duality.
It took time to reconcile. As recently as 2001, the Landry government banned all Quebec hospital leaders from participating in a conference on the medical needs of French-speaking communities held in Moncton because it was financed by Ottawa.
*****
Mr. Tanguay would like to mark the return to the nationalism of yesteryear by convening new states general, which would bring together all those, including the chambers of commerce, “who are committed to developing a strong Canadian Francophonie”. It is difficult not to see in his approach the influence of another former minister long involved in the constitutional file, namely Jean-Marc Fournier, who returned to service as advisor to the parliamentary wing of the PLQ in February last.
Responsible for Canadian Intergovernmental Affairs in the government of Philippe Couillard, Mr. Fournier also placed the Canadian Francophonie at the heart of his policy. He saw it blossom under the benevolent eye of English Canada, now seduced by the charm of Molière’s language.
He also spoke of a “diplomacy of the Francophonie”, which should impose on Quebec a certain restraint in its linguistic demands so as not to expose Francophones in other provinces to reprisals. At the time, the Couillard government was therefore opposed to the extension of the provisions of Bill 101 to companies under federal jurisdiction present in Quebec.
In a text published in The duty on the occasion of the 20e anniversary of the 1995 referendum, Mr. Fournier invited Quebecers to return to “the French-speaking Canadian family”, which had been disunited for too long. “For fifty years, we have been told that Quebec is our only home, we are told that elsewhere, it is their home. But what if their home was also our home?
We sometimes have the impression that this return to the Franco-Canadian fold is above all a return to the fold for this lost sheep, who will be able to kindly get back on his float, with little curly Saint John the Baptist, in the parade on June 24.