Premier Legault’s failed Anglo charm offensive

KAMOURASKA, QUE.—Quebec politics is like hockey, columnist Lysiane Gagnon once wrote: les Québécois like a team that fights to win, and that’s the one they will support, or respect. The May 14 march of thousands of citizens through downtown Montreal to protest Bill 96 showed Anglo-Quebecers were, in the words of the 1970s film Network’s Howard Beale, "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." Finally, francophone media and politicians began to take notice. From the time the bill was introduced in May 2021, anglophone analysts had warned it was dangerous, as it used the notwithstanding clause to protect the bill from court challenges. The Coalition Avenir Québec government repeated over and over again it was simply “good for French.” For several days following the rally, and prior to the passage of the bill in the National Assembly, Premier François Legault and his subordinates undertook a charm offensive in the Quebec media. The premier, Justice Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette, MNA Chris Skeete, the putative “Anglo representative” of the government, and even CAQ executive director Brigitte Legault were in front of microphones in short order. It was a desultory and futile effort. Skeete managed to slip away from some interviewers, but came a cropper with Evan Solomon on CTV. In the sort of interview press secretaries have nightmares about, Skeete claimed the notwithstanding clause was “not really all that important to the Constitution,” and by wrapping Bill 96 in it, the Legault government was just “sending a message to the judiciary.” On concerns non-francophones might be denied health care in English, he said people should “trust the government Japanese tourists would not die in the streets if they couldn’t speak French.” Similarly, Brigitte Legault offered up some serious nose-stretchers in an interview on the Herle Burly podcast with consultant David Herle. She offered, reading her notes from the premier’s office, “French would begin to disappear in Quebec in 30 years if not for Bill 96,” which is patently absurd. And then came the premier, who promised “nothing would change” under Bill 96 for the English-speaking community. This compares to his repeated boasting over the last year how everything would change under Bill 96. In short, the CAQ “charm offensive” turned out to be just, well, offensive. Bill 96 is a paradox, as it does nothing to prevent the so-called “decline” of French in Quebec, which is the raison d’être of the law. But it also does nothing to encourage the flourishing of the language. It is entirely punitive, and was drafted to reduce English health and social services, communications with professionals, services to new Quebecers, and limit CEGEP enrollment. As if on cue, the day after the law was passed, a note was sent to anglophone chartered accountants from their professional order, saying with regret it could no longer distribute information in English, thanks to the bill. If Montreal call-in shows and surveys were any indication, it was clear the English-speaking community was not buying what the premier was selling. Not unlike so many other misbegotten actions of the CAQ government, from COVID-19 deaths in long-term care to Bill 21, the “secularism law” that discriminates against religious minorities. It’s hard to believe the CAQ is expected to win 100 seats in the Oct. 3 election. Despite the use of the notwithstanding clause, the government will have to defend Bill 96 in court: many prominent lawyers have promised to take the bill as far as the United Nations. Negative American media reports about Bill 96 last week were a foreshadowing of the scrutiny it will face in the court of international public opinion. In reply, Jolin-Barrette promised a North American publicity campaign to defend it. Meanwhile, nationalist commentator Mathieu Bock-Côté gleefully promised defeat of the bill in the courts would represent “Meech Lake 2.0” and could propel Quebec to independence. It is not a pleasant scenario. François Legault will soon have to come to grips with the fact large parts of the law will be ridiculed and struck down. Meanwhile, the Trudeau government and its MPs, who have been hiding their heads in the sand over Bill 96, must respond to the threat it represents to national unity and to minorities in Quebec. Andrew Caddell is retired from Global Affairs Canada, where he was a senior policy adviser. He previously worked as an adviser to Liberal governments. He is a fellow with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and a town councillor in Kamouraska, Que. He can be reached at pipson52@hotmail.com. The Hill Times