Quebec crucial elections
Pauline
Marois, the premier of Quebec and leader of the Parti Québécois, had a
carefully prepared recipe whose ingredients entailed calling early elections,
handily winning the race and creating her party’s first majority government in
over a decade. Buoyed by positive poll numbers showing her in a commanding position,
she confidently proclaimed April 7th election day, expecting to
garner full power in the National Assembly.
Justine
Frangouli - Argyris
At the
outset, Marois touted her highly controversial Quebec Charter of Values, which aimed to abolish the wearing of religious
symbols amongst select public officials in the line of duty, that was popular among the electorate as it
encouraged the French-Canadians’ historical march towards secularization. Already distant from the Catholic Church,
this new charter was to accelerate Quebec’s path toward secular status by
diminishing the symbols of other religions and cultures, thereby creating the
perfect scenario for a solid Parti Québécois victory.
However, a
nonchalant Madame Marois, in an attempt to appease the radical hardcore of her
party that continues to aspire for nationhood, began musing about another
referendum aimed at independence for the province. Not only
did she begin openly discussing the plebiscite as if the provincial election
had already been won, but her controversial stance regarding the fait accompli
of a majority government led her to announce to a disbelieving electorate that
an independent Quebec would retain the Canadian dollar and a seat at the Bank of
Canada as a sovereign nation in a political and economic union similar to that
of the European Union.
Pauline
Marois’ election campaign was suddenly out of control. Instead of putting forth
a plan for the future of the economy and a sound fiscal policy for the
province, her focus resulted in a frenzy for Quebec independence.
As if the
swirling rumours of an upcoming post-election referendum were not enough, the
premier unveiled what she believed to be her ace in the hole in the name of
star candidate and Quebecor media magnate Pierre Karl Peladeau who quickly
pump-fisted on air that Quebec was ready to claim its independence and that he
desired that his children live in an independent Quebec.
Pauline
Marois brought Monsieur Peladeau into the political game in a quest to inspire
confidence among the business world for Quebec independence. However,
this proved a fatal mistake as the Parti Québécois is a left-leaning political
entity and the entry of Pierre Peladeau into the fray alienated many supporters
who evidently did not take warmly to the inclusion of a tycoon among their
ranks, especially one feigning social interventionism on behalf of the weak.
In fact, Pierre Peladeau’s track record in his dealings with the unions at his
media empire never endeared him with the voters of Quebec and the Parti
Québécois’ traditional blue collar base as he presided over a bitter, two-year
lockout of his employees that ended with 75% of those locked out eventually
losing their jobs. The suspicion with which Peladeau was viewed peaked while at
the same time exposing the premier, who refused to make the details of her
personal wealth public by claiming that she had submitted copies of her tax
returns to the National Assembly’s ethics commissioner, as emanating from the
same elite circles of Quebec’s plutocracy.
Today, mere
days before the election, Pauline Marois’ campaign is in freefall and badly
trailing her rival, Liberal Philippe Couillard, in the polls. By choosing to
openly flaunt the card of an unwanted referendum and sovereign Quebec, she is
caught in her own trap. And by
inadvertently bringing to light the aspect of her privileged profile, she has
fallen out among the province’s populace.
Regardless,
whoever is elected premier on Monday has a daunting task ahead. For, Canada’s French-speaking province is
saddled with lower economic growth and higher unemployment than the rest of the
country and is struggling with a huge debt load that continues to spiral out of control,
swelling from 37.6 billion dollars in 1990 to 175.5 billion today and leaving
no illusions about impending cutbacks to the bloated public sector and
government spending.