At the conference in Drummondville, constituents praised their leader and consensus. The most controversial resolutions were rejected from the outset. Others did not have time for thorough discussion. As a result, Bloc Québécois activists adopted key policies that most of them already supported.
A party strategist, on the sidelines of the Congress this weekend, opined that the independence movement has “grown up” and has become “more pragmatic”. In the corridors of the Drummondville Convention Center, members of the Bloc – especially those who have gone through a few crises between 2014 and 2019 – did not hide their smiles when they saw that this year’s meeting did not lead to any “psychotrama”.
The chef, Yves-Francois Blanchet, took ownership 97.25% support of its activists, in his first vote of confidence. In Sunday’s plenary meeting, only one resolution out of 121 considered was rejected by delegates.
Even then there were differences of opinion. Proposals regarding the unification of separatist forces under a grand black tent or secularism have generated much debate.
In this manner, this constituency has discussed the place to be given to the fighters of various independence parties in the provincial assembly.
Although they refused to support the Parti Québécois (PQ) exclusively, Bloc representatives agreed to pledge to “unite separatists of all stripes” while recognizing the “historic and privileged ties” that unite the Bloc and the PQ. However, one young militant, Félix-Antoine Brault, worried that this recognition would alienate the fighters of the belated Option National and their desire to join the bloc. “It’s a wasted and easily redeemable potential,” he said, disbelieving the majority.
Yves-François Blanchet refused to see this shared vote as restlessness or heartbreak. He responded at a press conference on Sunday that the party had simply reiterated its historical position.
After a while, the delegates decided that their party should secure a majority of positions in the National Assembly, and not just government positions. “This is possible without being forced to support a government that wants a motorway tunnel that we don’t want,” argued activist Simon Marchant.
Secularism, with subtleties
As for the debate on secularism, this too revealed little disagreement. Activists were alarmed by the resolution that the government “shall not recognize, pay or subsidize any form of worship” and “protect only secularism”. [les valeurs progressistes et égalitaires] against doctrine and religious fundamentalism.
“If we use the word ‘cult,’ we’re going to hit the nail on the head,” argued Florence Gosselin, which the majority ignored as well.
A second proposal condemning any attempt to prevent Quebec from establishing secularism and the wearing of religious symbols by a person in a position of power was divided during the vote.
Youth council president Rose Lesard admitted she was uncomfortable with this part of the Quebec state secularism law. “Quebec is everybody’s Quebec. And every person who wants to work can work with what he hears as symptoms,” he said DutyIn his own opinion.
However, the general principle of secularism was not discussed among the young constituents, he asserted. Mr. Blanchett later did the same in a press conference. “There’s room [au Bloc] For all debates, for all subjects, for all debates”, he promised.
The immigration debate was abandoned
The often-talked-about activist proposals, on the other hand, have been rejected.
Those in immigration: respect the reception capacity or irregular immigration “and those who use it to weaken Quebec”.
Two others, who said Quebec’s lack of full powers over immigration were an “obstacle to social cohesion,” were rejected in subcommittee Saturday.
Constituency MPs, both behind the microphone and behind the scenes, protested in discussions with delegates.
Yves-François Blanchet denied being given a watchword to avoid controversy. Instead, he called on his representatives to leave it to the militants, the leader insisted.
When Quebec Premier François Legault attributed the decline of the French and non-French speakers to “national integration,” Mr. Blanchett refused. Immigration.
His representatives, however, admitted they wanted to avoid the same criticism.
Precedence and judicial “excess” in Quebec
Apart from these brief discussions, Bloc members proceeded largely in unanimity. They agreed to demand federal voting rights from age 16, to allow youths to become party members from age 14, to oppose positive “discrimination” in the award of university research chairs, and to campaign for the decriminalization of simple possession. For drugs and Senate abolition.
All resolutions calling for Quebec laws and the Quebec environmental assessment process to take precedence over their federal counterparts were passed. The preservation of the French language was vigorously defended.
On the other hand, the delegates did not have time to decide whether Quebec should appoint all federal judges in its territory or reject “judicial violations of the Supreme Court of Canada when affecting Quebec’s exclusive jurisdiction.”
Watch the video
“Music geek. Coffee lover. Devoted food scholar. Web buff. Passionate internet guru.”
