Does the Quebec Liberal Party stand for anything?

There was a turning point in Quebec politics in 2016, when Jean-françois Lisée was elected leader of the Parti Québécois on a promise not to hold a referendum on independence in the first term of a new PQ government.

That deprived the federalist Quebec Liberal Party of the election issue on which it had depended for nearly 50 years. As a result, in the 2018 general election, the Liberals suffered the worst defeat in their party's history.

Without a threat of separation to defend against, it was no longer clear what the party stood for. And since Dominique Anglade became their leader in May, it isn't clear whether it stands for anything at all.

Anglade seems to be following the advice of nationalist commentators arguing what American journalist Matthew Yglesias called the “pundit's fallacy.” That's “the belief that what a politician needs to do to improve his of her political standing is do what the pundit wants substantively.”

Since the 2018 election, nationalist commentators have been telling the Liberals that the way to “reconnect” with francophone voters is to become more nationalist.

In October, following the controversy over the use of the N-word in a class at the University of Ottawa by a francophone professor, Anglade joined a nationalist campaign against “political correctness.” Her contribution included a petition, apparently in French only, on the Liberal website.

Shortly afterward, on the 25th anniversary of the 1995 sovereignty referendum, she published an open letter calling for transfers of power from Ottawa to Quebec, including over language.

Anglade's “nationalist shift” earned praise from Québecor commentator Mathieu BockCôté, Quebec's most prominent advocate of francophone cultural and political supremacy.

On the Coalition Avenir Québec government's forthcoming proposed language legislation, the leader of the Liberal official Opposition in the Assembly appears to be following the lead of the “minister of identity,” Simon Jolin-barrette.

Two weeks ago, the Liberals endorsed a motion proposed by Jolin-barrette containing the objectives of, and arguments for, the language legislation he is to present next year. That legislation, he has said, would restrict access to English public services.

And this week, it appeared that Anglade had helped Jolin-barrette put pressure on the Trudeau government in support of a proposal to subject Quebec businesses under federal jurisdiction to Bill 101's rules on language in the workplace.

While the proposal would benefit relatively few Quebec francophones, it would be a political defeat for anglophones, since it would require Ottawa's acceptance of “asymmetrical” language rights, with less protection for anglophones than francophones.

When the PQ refused to co-sign an open letter from Jolin-barrette in favour of the proposal, dismissing it as “political marketing,” Gilles Duceppe, former Bloc Québécois leader, got the six living former Quebec premiers, PQ and Liberal, to sign one of their own.

It's doubtful that the former Liberal leaders, Daniel Johnson, Jean Charest, and Philippe Couillard, would have signed without the prior approval of the present one.

Anglade may be betting that she can make gains among francophones, or at least give them one less reason to vote against her party, without losing what has been the Liberals' captive non-francophone support.

She may find, however, that neither needs a Liberal party that is a pale copy of the CAQ.

Francophones may prefer the nationalist original. And while no party seriously competes with the Liberals for the votes of non-francophones, the latter still have an alternative to voting for Anglade's party. They can stay home.

Apparently, thousands did in the last election. While province-wide turnout declined by five percentage points from the previous election, in predominantly non-francophone ridings it fell by more than 10 points, and in some by nearly 20.

That may not have cost the Liberals any seats. But it probably cost them money, since the public allowance that now accounts for more than 70 per cent of their revenue is based on their share of the vote.