Bernard Drainville was eagerly awaited. How on earth would the ex-host, former PQ minister, ex-creator of the Charter of Values, explain his conversion to the CAQ as a candidate in Lévis?
A skilled communicator, he has above all taken up François Legault’s “ni-ni” credo since he himself left the PQ to found the CAQ in 2011. The “ni-ni” being to say he is neither sovereigntist nor federalist , but nationalist. Exit the “s” word and the “f” word.
Flanked yesterday by Mr. Drainville – a sizeable catch – Mr. Legault summed it up perfectly: “Let’s get out of the division between federalists and sovereignists. Let’s be nationalists within Canada. This is where the Quebecers are”.
Reputed to be a convinced separatist, Bernard Drainville even refused to say if he was still so “at heart”. The moment was a bit awkward.
Uncomfortable because in this refusal in the ranks of the CAQ to call itself sovereignist or federalist – it is nevertheless a coalition of the two – is the refusal to recognize that we no longer expect the Great Evening of Independence or renewed federalism.
We refuse to do so because it would remind us of the double impasse in which Quebec has voluntarily been drifting since the failure of the Meech Lake Accord and the narrow victory of No in 1995. Neither independent nor autonomous within Canada. The observation is flatly factual.
Both nationalists and federalists
The federalist option, even tinged with a dark nationalist blue, is nevertheless a legitimate political choice. In fact, all the federalist premiers of Quebec, except Philippe Couillard, were nationalists in their own way.
The late Robert Bourassa, Liberal Prime Minister from 1970 to 1976 and from 1985 to 1994, was also resolutely so. From linguistic crises to constitutional psychodramas, he tried to strengthen Quebec within Canada.
Often he failed. Because to dance, you need two partners. However, except for Brian Mulroney, Canada does not want to dance with Quebec. The difference, however, is this.
Robert Bourassa, the nationalist, had no trouble calling himself a federalist. Not that he liked doing it – his sensitivities towards English Canada bordering on the zero degree – but he assumed Quebec’s belonging to Canada. Which, even today, is called federalism.
Reshaping political discourse
So when Bernard Drainville yesterday called the sovereigntist and federalist options a “false dilemma”, a “cul-de-sac”, an “old debate” and an “old paradigm” – and that only the “third way of nationalism” exists –, in turn, he turns the corners a little round.
The fact remains that the CAQ’s greatest success is to have been able to reshape the dominant political discourse in Quebec along the same lines. To such an extent that only the Liberals still dare to call themselves federalists.
Whereas, in fact, this third way is the umpteenth version of a nationalist federalism. The “identity” colors of the CAQ are certainly more assertive.
But because they are available within Canada, they espouse at the same time the federalist option, the nationalist version. Why not say it ?
It is true that a majority of Francophones are in the same place as François Legault on this issue as on others. They have become federalist nationalists. Again, a legit option.
This is also why they are less and less likely to vote for the PQ – which is not federalist – or for the PLQ – which is no longer nationalist.
Reference-www.journaldemontreal.com