With Normandeau’s arrest, Liberals’ re-election looks less certain

If there’s a safe bet in Quebec politics, it’s that a first-term government will almost always get a second term.

The exception that proves the rule is Pauline Marois’s Parti Québécois minority government, voted out two years ago after 19 months in office. Every other government elected to a first term since 1970 has been re-elected at least once.

No government, however, has full control over the political agenda. The unexpected happens, as it did so spectacularly last Thursday when Nathalie Normandeau was arrested on corruption charges. And suddenly, with Normandeau’s arrest, the Liberals’ re-election no longer looked like such a sure thing.

Six others were arrested along with Normandeau by UPAC, the province’s anti-corruption squad, including two linked to the PQ.

It was Normandeau, however, who drew most of the attention. She’s the most prominent Quebec provincial politician, active or retired, arrested on criminal charges related to political activities in more than 50 years.

Normandeau was deputy premier in Jean Charest’s former Liberal government; some Liberals even saw her as a possible successor to Charest. (Imagine UPAC arresting a premier in office.)

The arrest came as even more of a shock because the Liberals had avoided blame in the Charbonneau report on corruption in the construction industry, and because some people had suspected that police and prosecutors were reluctant to go after provincial politicians.

The Liberal party is considering expelling Normandeau from its ranks. It’s not so easy, however, for the present Liberal government to distance itself from her.

She was a prominent Liberal minister from 2003 until she left politics less than five years ago, and several members of Philippe Couillard’s present cabinet, including the premier himself, sat with her at the Charest cabinet table.

Couillard has complained of the “pressure” Charest’s ministers were under to raise at least $100,000 a year in contributions to the Liberal party. UPAC says the allegations against Normandeau and the other accused include the “systemic” acceptance of illegal political contributions in return for government subsidies and contracts.

One former Charest minister who is no longer in politics, Marguerite Blais, said after Normandeau’s arrest that it wasn’t easy for Blais to raise the $100,000 because “I was the minister for seniors, I wasn’t one who could give contracts.” The obvious implication was that it was easier for, say, the ministers of transport or municipal affairs, the latter being Normandeau’s portfolio from 2005 to 2009.

This leads to the questions raised by Thursday’s bombshell: Is that it? Or will other prominent Liberals be arrested between now and the next election? Will any of them be members of the present government?

The investigations into areas including Liberal fundraising that led to the charges against Normandeau took more than four years. And the head of UPAC, Robert Lafrenière, said after last Thursday’s arrests that the anti-corruption squad is still conducting another 46 criminal investigations.

And even if there are no more arrests before the next election, this story isn’t going away. It will come back whenever Normandeau appears in court.

It might be better for the Liberals if Normandeau pleads guilty when she appears in court April 20, eliminating the need for what could be a long, sensational public trial.

Normandeau’s lawyer has said his client will plead not guilty to the charges against her. Given the current delays in Quebec courts, Normandeau’s case might not be heard for more than four years — that is, until after the next election.

Will she change her mind, however, after she sees what Lafrenière has described as the “concrete-solid” evidence gathered by UPAC, so she can spare herself the cost in legal fees of a drawn-out court battle? Might she then negotiate a lighter sentence in return for testifying against others?

So many questions hanging over the Liberals between now and the next election, to which, at this point, they can’t possibly know the answers.