[Chronique de Michel David] The dialogue of the deaf by François Legault


François Legault has a rather particular sense of humor. “I made a commitment not to reopen the debate on the voting method. I will keep my commitment,” he said. In other words, the Prime Minister undertakes not to renege on the reneging of the promise he made in 2018. Should we be laughing?

Failing to ensure that the voting system ensures a fairer representation of the opposition parties, the Prime Minister says he wants to work more closely with them. It will not be difficult to do better than during the first mandate, you will say. That remains to be seen. Chase the natural…

The government is no doubt quite prepared to find an arrangement that would allow Québec solidaire and the Parti Québécois to have the resources and speaking time that would enable them to play their role properly, even if they do not meet the criteria set out for be officially recognized as parliamentary groups.

Rather, it is the Liberal Party that will be reluctant to share the limelight. Despite the disappointing result obtained by QS, many Quebecers still see Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois as the real leader of the opponents of the CAQ government, and Dominique Anglade certainly does not intend to reinforce this perception.

As for the Conservative Party, Éric Duhaime will have to find a solution himself. Without a deputation, the doors of Parliament will remain closed to him. Despite the frustration of the Caquist deputies who will be disappointed not to be called upon to be part of the Council of Ministers, counting on possible defections seems very optimistic.

* * * * *

At the beginning of a mandate, the tone of the debate is generally in moderation. Four years from the next election, energy saving is in order. Moreover, all the opposition parties have serious work to do internally. Mr. Legault has expressed his intention to collaborate with each other on various issues, but we must not have any illusions. The end of the electoral campaign did not eliminate the deep differences that fueled it.

It is hard to imagine any partnership with QS on the issue of the environment. The “climatopassivity” of the CAQ served as fuel for Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois throughout the campaign. Mr. Legault would take advantage of any appearance of collaboration with QS, which would instead be accused of compromise.

Similarly, the decline of French and the inadequacy of Bill 96 (Act respecting the official and common language of Quebec, French) were at the heart of Paul St-Pierre Plamondon’s speech. Unless Mr. Legault suddenly decides to extend the provisions of Bill 101 to the college level, which seems highly unlikely, it can hardly be established anything other than a dialogue of the deaf.

In the eyes of Dominique Anglade, the labor shortage is the main handicap from which the Quebec economy suffers, and it commands an increase in the immigration thresholds that Mr. Legault considers suicidal. End of the discussion.

If the Prime Minister does not intend to admit Éric Duhaime to Parliament, it is perhaps an exchange on the efficiency of the State with the Conservative leader that would interest him the most. We have seen that the sincerities of Mr. Legault follow one another in an astonishing way, but Mr. Duhaime perhaps believes that he is still the man who wanted to put the State on a diet, as many sovereignists had imagined. that he secretly remained one of them.

* * * * *

However, there is one point on which the five parties were in agreement, namely increasing Quebec’s powers in the area of ​​immigration. Not everyone intended to use it the same way, but they agreed on the principle.

As if he wanted to show how unimpressed he was by the CAQ’s victory, Justin Trudeau hastened to reiterate that there was no question of giving anything away, while adding that he was ready to work with the Legault government to send Quebec… more immigrants. It’s called provocation.

Given the remarks that Mr. Legault and his ex-Minister of Immigration, Jean Boulet, made during the campaign, it would be much better to “departicialise” the file. In interview at To have toÉric Duhaime had already proposed a common approach to force the hand of Ottawa.

In reality, the stakes are such that all of civil society should now be seized of the question. Mr. Legault should begin to specify how he conceives the great collective reflection he mentioned last spring. Before thinking about a referendum, we should first agree on exactly what powers we want and what we want to do with them.

To see in video


Back to top button