LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

In Quebec, there is some wind in the ship Independence. For months now, a big part of the political agenda has been set not by François Legault and the CAQ, but by the good old Parti Québécois.

For weeks now, the most interesting water-cooler discussions have been about Quebec’s road to independence, as set by the PQ. The separatist party has launched an ad featuring none other than François Legault gushing about the urgency of achieving independence. The ad was to promote the release of the Year 1 Budget, showcasing how an independent Quebec would not only be financially viable, but advantageous.

The clip is 20 years old, mind you, but it worked. François Legault has taken the bait and commented on the PQ agenda multiple times over the past few weeks. Believing that keeping the Canadian dollar and Canada’s monetary policy would not work out to the advantage of Quebecers, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon is pushing for Quebec to eventually have its own currency.

Not only did Economy Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon take the bait and argue against a Quebec currency, he went a step further: “The currency, I would take the American dollar, I would be very happy.” If the Economy Minister thinks we can discuss which money an Independent Quebec should use, it must mean it is a pretty good idea, no?

This all comes down after an unequivocal victory of the Parti Québécois in a by-election in the Quebec City area. The Péquistes were quick to celebrate Pascal Paradis’ win in Jean-Talon as an historic victory. Certainly, the PQ had never before managed to win the riding before, a riding which was once a liberal stronghold. The PQ came within 25 votes of a victory in 1994, before seeing its vote crumble to the point of finishing 4th place in the 2018 elections, and in 2019 (another by-election). And now Pascal Paradis has obtained more raw votes than former CAQ MNA Joëlle Boutin got in the 2022 election, despite a much lower turnout.

The PQ is on a roll. Some are already thinking about forming the next government. Others, even more enthusiastic, see this victory as a giant step towards independence. We can’t stop people from dreaming.

Paul St-Pierre Plamondon undoubtedly prefers to look at this as a potential turning point, similar to the one set by current Deputy Premier Geneviève Guilbault, who brought down a liberal stronghold in 2017, a victory which paved the way for the Caquistes to take office a few months later.

But the fact remains that, despite Jean-Talon, the Parti Québécois is facing a serious trend, which began more than a decade ago, one that threatens its very existence. The victory of Pascal Paradis does not change the overall picture: the PQ today has only four MNAs in the National Assembly, still fewer than at any other period since 1970.

But for now, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon is hoping to build on this momentum. He wants to  restore hope in the heart of PQ activists. He knows there is a lot of work to do. But he won’t frame it as such : “We can call it work, but I don’t see it as a sacrifice, it will happen spontaneously because it will be pride that replaces fear, working with pride. I do it when I make my Christmas tree!” he said to the general council of the Parti Québécois last weekend.

With the support of 98.51% of delegates at the most recent PQ Convention —  a score that Lucien Bouchard and Bernard Landry could only ever dream of —  the young PQ leader has shown initiative and flair since the last general election. St-Pierre Plamondon has been able to take advantage of a CAQ government showing signs of fatigue, internal divisions within Québec solidaire, the historic weakness of the Liberals and the inability of the Conservatives to break through, even in Quebec City. The challenge now will be to seize this opportunity to rebuild the party and sow a seed in the minds of voters: the PQ has once again become a serious alternative on the Quebec political scene.

 

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is only available to our subscribers!

Become a subscriber today!

Register

Already a subscriber?

Subscriber Login

This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is only available to our subscribers!

Become a subscriber today!

Register

Already a subscriber?

Subscriber Login

This content is only available to our subscribers!

Become a subscriber today!

Register

Already a subscriber?

Subscriber Login

This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau is often referred to as the architect of modern Canada. As the man chiefly responsible for repatriating the constitution and embedding within it a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, complete with official bilingualism and multiculturalism, Trudeau had an immense impact upon Canada and its maturation into the more united and confident nation we see today.

While not every one of his policy achievements have survived him (the National Energy Program, the Foreign Investment Review Agency, etc.) those most important to Trudeau and his vision of the country have prevailed, much to the enduring pride of everyday Canadians.

Trudeau understood that for a country as diverse and decentralized country as Canada to not only survive, but thrive in the coming decades, its citizens would need more than just an old flag, the myth of peacekeeping and a severely underfunded public healthcare system to unite behind. They would need his new pillars of nationhood – namely, the Charter, bilingualism, and multiculturalism – all of which Trudeau established during his 15-plus years in office.

Of course, as is the case with any great reformer, change is not always wholeheartedly embraced by all in society. The same is true with Trudeau. Not everyone has endorsed his vision for the country.

In the 37 years since his political retirement, many have sought to undermine his herculean efforts at nation-building. His opponents have come from all political backgrounds and ideologies, ranging from western reformers like Preston Manning, who, at one point, sought to eliminate federally regulated bilingualism, to Quebec sovereigntists like Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parizeau, who have lambasted patriation and worse, sought secession from the rest of Canada. Even some former Conservative Prime Ministers, like Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper, have at times joined the fray in attacking different aspects of Trudeau’s legacy.

Fortunately, all have failed in their unholy pursuits.

Now, with another Trudeau at the helm of power in Ottawa, and with the separatist forces in Quebec considerably diminished, it would appear to many that Pierre Trudeau’s Canada is free from any significant internal threat.

But the reality, of course, could not be further from the truth.

In fact, the foundational principles of modern Canada, of Pierre Trudeau’s Canada, have been under relentless assault.

The assault of which I speak has been carried out by none other than popular Quebec premier Francois Legault.

Though he has only been in office a few years, Legault has become a formidable threat to Trudeau Sr.’s legacy. He assails each and every one of his accomplishments whenever he can.

The Charter. Respect for linguistic minorities. The official promotion of different cultures within Canadian society. None have been free from Legault’s wrath.

While the evidence of Legault’s hostility has been pervasive throughout his actions in political life, one could deny it no longer, when, in the spring of 2019, his government passed into law the infamous Bill 21.

Through the use of this noxious legislation, Legault and his government have unfairly targeted and persecuted religious minorities. By banning public sector employees – many of whom are Muslim women – from wearing their religious symbols and garments at work, Legault has made a mockery of both the principles behind Canada’s multiculturalism policy and the Charter’s protection of minority rights. That, coupled with his preemptive invocation of the notwithstanding clause to shield Bill 21 from the oversight of the courts is further proof of his disdain for the rights and freedoms enshrined in Trudeau’s Charter.

Alas, Bill 21 is not the only battle front that Legault and his government have used to wage war against Pierre Trudeau’s legacy.

His government has also preemptively invoked the notwithstanding clause on another piece of controversial legislation, Bill 96.

To some, the bill might seem innocuous enough at first reading. But further analysis of its 200 amendments, purportedly aimed at strengthening the French language, make it clear that Bill 96 is just another weapon that Legault is using to bludgeon the minority language rights of Quebec’s English-speaking population. Not to mention Trudeau’s treasured belief in the equality of Canada’s two official languages.

Indeed, the bill does far more than promote the usage of French. It also restricts the ability of Quebec anglophones to converse and do business; something the Quebec Community Groups Network and others believe could “disrupt the two-decades-old social peace around language.”

Make no doubt about it. Pierre Trudeau would have been appalled by Legault decision to sacrifice the language rights of Quebec’s English-speaking minority, just as he would have been by Legault’s attempts to unilaterally rewrite the constitution to affirm the nation status of Quebec, another one of Bill 96’s controversial additions.

In the face of all these assaults, one might have expected Pierre Trudeau’s son to have taken up his father’s defense. After all, Justin Trudeau won his first federal election as Liberal leader in part by campaigning on his father’s political record. Later, while in office, Justin continued to praise his father’s key political achievements, including by releasing official statements celebrating the anniversaries of both the Charter and Multiculturalism.

However, despite all his self-professed admiration for these nation-building feats, Justin has proven to be anything but a stalwart defender of his father’s vision for the country.

While the prime minister has stated on multiple occasions that he “deeply” disagrees with Bill 21 and, like his father, is fundamentally opposed to the use of the notwithstanding clause, he has thus far stopped short of confronting Legault, let alone taking any legal or political action to defend his father’s legacy.

The reasoning behind his inaction is simple: Justin fears that any sort of federal intervention against either Bill’s 21 or 96 will only encourage Legault in his Ottawa-bashing, which in turn, might cost the Liberal’s seats in Quebec, come election time. That same thinking, by the way, pervades the mindsets of both his chief political opponents, former Tory leader Erin O’Toole and Jagmeet Singh, who have similarly stayed quiet in trepidation of Quebec voters.

Still, these men do not bear the last name “Trudeau.” Nor have they underscored to voters (both in Quebec and the rest of Canada) their commitment to Pierre Trudeau’s legacy, as Justin has done. Therefore, while their failure to stand up for the Charter and its protections for religious and minority language rights is lamentable, it is not nearly as disheartening as is the Prime Minister’s.

For Canada to maintain the newfound confidence and unity it gained after Pierre Trudeau’s tenure, what with its constitutional embrace of a Charter, bilingualism, and multiculturalism, it will need a champion in Ottawa to defend these pillars of nationhood against all those who seek to weaken or abolish them.

Silence will no longer do. Nor will the Prime Minister’s prolonging of action.

The Charter needs a champion. So too does religious minorities and English language speakers in Quebec.

If Justin Trudeau is truly the keeper of his father’s legacy, he will become that champion and finally stand up to Legault and anyone else that threatens the foundations of modern Canada.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.