Debate in English looks like a Lisée trap for Legault

It remains to be seen, however, whether this event will actually take place

It’s understandable if Quebec anglophones were excited that leaders of the four parties in the National Assembly agreed in principle this week to a televised debate in English during the campaign for the Oct. 1 general election.

It would be only the second leaders’ debate in English in a Quebec election campaign ever, and the first on television. There was one on radio in 1985 (in which the leader of a short-lived, fringe, pro-independence party was included on the order of the chief electoral officer — and then refused to speak English).

Anglo voters are not used to receiving such attention from the provincial parties. But for the first time in a Quebec election in nearly 30 years, anglo votes are in play.

That’s because Parti Québécois leader Jean-François Lisée has taken the secession issue out of the election by promising that a PQ government would not hold a referendum in its first term.

At first glance, it’s surprising that it was the PQ leader who agreed first to an English debate, since history suggests that the party of political separation from Canada and Bill 101 stands to gain few anglo votes.

Lisée has even been criticized for it by anglophobic nationalists who oppose the public use of English on the grounds that it “sends the wrong message to immigrants” — namely, that they don’t have to speak French.

Indeed, that was the serious message behind the motion against the bilingual “BonjourHi” greeting that the Assembly unanimously adopted in December — which Lisée proposed.

When Liberal Premier Philippe Couillard blundered into angering anglos by allowing the motion to be debated and then having his MNAs vote for it, Lisée boasted that the Liberals had fallen into a trap he had set for them.

Now, the great tactician has set another trap, this time for François Legault, leader of the Coalition Avenir Québec party.

In challenging the other leaders to an English debate, Lisée may actually have his eye on francophone votes.

Contrary to what mathematically challenged Journal de Montréal columnists suggest, Quebec elections are not decided by the non-francophones who make up only 18 per cent of the electorate. They’re won or lost in French Quebec, where the Coalition is competing with the PQ for nationalist votes.

At the same time, however, the CAQ has positioned itself as the default alternative for anglos tired of feeling taken for granted by the Liberals.

Francos might not sit through a couple of hours of simultaneous translation. Still, an English debate would be major campaign news in the French-language media.

So far, the CAQ has got away with offering little to anglo voters in particular, other than the means to vote out the Liberals.

But in an English debate, Couillard might pressure Legault into making concessions to anglos. The PQ could then accuse the Coalition leader of weakness in defence of French.

Despite this week’s excitement, however, it’s not yet certain that there will be an English debate.

Nobody wanted to look bad by ducking Lisée’s challenge. But nobody really committed themselves to anything, either.

This would be a third debate in a campaign of only 33 days; two in French have already been scheduled. And this one would be in the leaders’ second language, on different issues, requiring them to take additional time out from campaigning for preparation. Legault, in particular, is less fluent in English than Couillard and Lisée.

The date, format and topics of the debate would have to be negotiated among the four parties as well as the consortium of Englishlanguage media holding it.

A party could prevent the debate by making demands unacceptable to others, or drawing out the talks until it is too late to work the event into the campaign calendar. So anglos might want to contain their excitement until the date for the debate is announced. For until there’s a date, there is no debate.