We are activists of Québec Solidaire (QS) and have followed with concern the unfolding of the crisis that the party is currently going through, more particularly since the departure of Émilise Lessard-Therrien. We know that the decisions of the QS National Council this weekend will have a decisive impact on the future of our party.
Most of us have been involved in organizational or party leadership tasks for a long time. Others were founding members of Citizen Option, the Union of Progressive Forces, then QS, or are young activists, feminists, ecologists, students, mobilized by the stated desire for social change carried by QS . Some deputies and some members of the National Coordination Committee welcomed our approach with interest and openness.
We find ourselves in the declaration “Uniting to govern differently”, signed by more than 200 members of the party, which insists on the need to preserve our unity and renew our anchoring in social movements from a feminist and democratic perspective. Like the QS National Women’s Commission, we believe that “better listening to the voices of activists, and in particular women, is essential to emerge from this crisis and return to the course of founding values[…] party “.
Some of the criticisms of too much centralization of decisions seem to have been heard. But during the next National Council, it remains necessary to find “a way through” to overcome other dimensions of the crisis. It is in this spirit that we call on delegates to consider the following proposals for action:
1. At the next National Council: place the Saguenay Declaration in its proper context. While recognizing the importance of the regional tour launched by QS as well as the work carried out to take the regions into account, we believe that the Saguenay Declaration must be placed in its context. This text is only “the political synthesis of the tour of the regions”. It can therefore be neither “the foundation” nor the beginning of a new QS program. In a letter to the members of the associations, the president of QS, Roxane Milot, rightly recalled that “this text in no way calls into question the other positions of the party”. We propose to the delegates who will meet at the next National Council:
a) to ensure that the party publicly emphasizes the fact that the Saguenay Declaration is not intended to serve as a starting point for a new program for QS;
b) to take into account, in the broadest possible democratic spirit, the changes proposed by the associations to improve this declaration.
2. Over the coming months: encourage broad discussion about the program. The proposal from the National Coordination Committee taken up by Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois to rewrite the program, and to do it in an extremely short time, seems counterproductive to us. This was the strength of QS and the guarantee of a democratic approach: having built its political program step by step, taking the time to think about each of its dimensions.
It is normal that in light of the transformations in Quebec society, our program needs to be updated. But rather than wanting to “tablet it out”, without having taken stock of it, it might be more judicious to simply update some of its passages.
Furthermore, wanting to erase the patient collective work spanning 15 years to rewrite the program from scratch and have it adopted in a few months while the party is shaken by an internal crisis goes against what gives QS its solidity and its strength: a left pluralism making room for the convergence of the currents which exist within it.
This is why we are immediately proposing to the National Council in May:
a) adopt an approach that allows the targeted updating of the Québec solidaire program;
b) to adopt a timetable reviewed over time and democratic mechanisms allowing an in-depth debate as well as the involvement of the party’s grassroots authorities.
3. Open the debate on strategy. As desired, the question of the departure of Émilise Lessard-Therrien was put on the revised agenda of the next National Council. However, the debate on strategy, requested by so many speakers, is conspicuous by its absence.
However, recent statements by co-spokesperson Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois imply a well-established strategy regarding the seizure of power. In view of the reactions they have provoked, a broad debate becomes necessary. It is from this collectively decided strategy that the updating of our program, our electoral platform, our statutes, etc. must result.
Of course, it is not a question of resolving this question at the next National Council, but of initiating the debate and, on the basis of a fully democratic approach guided by feminist principles, of marking out its contours.
To do this, we propose that QS set up “ad hoc democratic deliberation spaces” allowing this debate to be conducted in depth and lead to a series of strategic orientations which could be discussed and voted on at its fall congress. 2024. To the extent that a revision of the statutes has been scheduled, we believe it is necessary to precede this congress with events and deliberative spaces where it would be possible to discuss the strategic question more freely. We could think of setting up “a summer school or university” to launch the debate.
We could also organize “an open national conference” (as we did in the past regarding the national question) which would allow the main theses to be debated. In all cases, it will be a question of seeking the contribution of sympathizers as well as the various social movements which share our aspirations.
It is at this price that we will be able to remain a pluralist left party and, equipped with a clarified strategy, achieve our common objective: to be this party of government AND social transformation that Quebec so needs to face the challenges of our time.
*The full list of signatories is here.