Wednesday 18 May 2011

Lessons from Quebec for Big Eck

Jacque Parizeau. Economist. Worked in energy.
Committed Nationalist. Very assured of himself. Sound familiar?
In 1976, the nationalist Parti Québécois (PQ) won the election to the Quebec National Assembly for the first time, winning 71 seats out of 110. This was a meteoric rise, considering that in the 1970 and 1973 elections, PQ had only won 7 and 6 seats respectively.

The PQ promised "good government" and they also promised a referendum on "sovereignty association" - for example :  a single currency, free trade and a harmonisation of trade tariffs with the rest of Canada. This concept is very similar to the "social union" with the rump UK espoused by the SNP combined with the benefits of EU membership.

In 1980, the referendum on "sovereignty association" was held. Early indications were that the "yes" side would win. This was despite the "no" side having the backing of the French-Canadian Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau. As the campaign went on, Trudeau promised constitutional reforms in Canada as a whole, saying that no vote wouldn't mean that things would stay the same for the rest of Canada (full UK Federalism?).

The no vote triumphed by 59.6% to 44.4%. The PQ leader René Lévesque said, "If I've understood you well, you're telling me 'until next time'."

Despite the referendum defeat, PQ were re-elected to government in the 1981 Quebec election - winning 80 seats. However sovereignty as an issue was laid to rest.

Pierre Trudeau also outmaneuvered PQ by agreeing constitutional reforms with English-speaking Provincial Premiers before Lévesque had a chance to enter the discussion. This became known as the "kitchen accords" and was seen as a betrayal by Quebec nationalists.

Could a parallel in the UK be Barnett Formula reforms? Where Wales and the English regions would be big winners as Scotland loses out, but with Scotland having to bear more fiscal responsibility?

In 1984, PQ went through a major crisis, where the gradualist, conciliatory approach of René Lévesque was rejected by many in the party - causing defections. This cost PQ a majority in the Quebec National Assembly and a string of by-election defeats. This led to the resignation of
Lévesque as party leader, and they subsequently lost the 1985 Quebec election to the Liberal Party (the Canadian equivalent of Labour).

It wasn't until 1994 that PQ, under the leadership of Jacque Parizeau, would be returned to government in Quebec. This was after thumping defeats in the 1985 and 1989 elections. Again independence was on the agenda, and again Canada was led by a French-Canadian Prime Minister in Jean Chrétien. This time though, the referendum would be about giving the Quebec National Assembly the right to declare Quebec "sovereign", serving as a legal basis for independence.

Unlike the 1980 campaign, the initial polls pointed towards a big "no" vote. The popular Bloc Québécois (Quebec Nationalist party in the Canadian Federal Parliament/"Westminster") leader Lucien Bouchard took a more prominent role in the campaign. Despite nearly dying from necrotizing fasciitis and losing his left leg, he campaigned on crutches in public, bringing a massive wave of sympathy from the electors.

Polls changes from "no" to "yes". Jean Chrétien promised more constitutional reforms if there was a no-vote, just as Pierre Trudeau had. It looked as though Quebec was heading towards independence - even the Queen was tricked into saying on a radio show that the referendum could go "the wrong way".

However, Quebec voted no by the slimmest of margins, 50.5% to 49.5% with a 94% turnout.


In the aftermath, Jacque Parizeau resigned as PQ leader, with Lucien Bouchard succeeding him. Support for independence in Quebec has fallen gradually over the years, being as low as 28% in 2009, and sovereignty was put on the back burner by PQ, leading to another term in government 1998.

After losing the 2003 Quebec election, PQ haven't been returned to power, with the Liberal Party running Quebec ever since. Polls for the 2012 Quebec election though, do show PQ taking a slim lead over the Liberal Party, with another centre-right nationalist party - Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ) - taking a fair chunk of the votes.

It seems as though in 2012, Quebec is heading for a pro-independence majority. Whether that will lead to another referendum though remains to be seen. What is clear is that there are some historic parallels between Quebec and Scotland. Whether the referendum in the coming years will be Scotland's 1980, 1995 or a yes vote will depend on what lessons the SNP learns from the successes and failures of Parti Québécois.

2 comments:

  1. Good piece and something I've been thinking about too. The other scenario is Euskari (the 3 autonomous Basque province - there are 7 in all; Navarre which is also in Spain and 3 in France).

    There the PNV have held power for 30 years. Their president Ibarretxe proposed a referendum on 'free association' quoting the relationship between Puerto Rico and the USA, in 2006.

    Unfortunately the Spanish government has made referenda on independence 'unconstitutional' (yes, you're not allowed to vote democratically to leave Spain!). My guess is that the referendum would have been won as there is a majority for the three nationalist blocs within Euskadi.

    So, the SNP could be like the Quebec nationalists - lose a referendum or they could be like the PNV - not hold a referendum but be in power for a generation. The only reason the PNV aren't in power now is that Spain gerrymandered the last election, discounting the 10%-14% vote which usually goes to 'Batasuna' (Basque Sinn Fein if you like) and so giving an artificial majority to PSOE (Labour) and PP (Conservative) who, no surprises here - cooperated to keep the Spanish parties and Basque nationalist majority out.

    Macsen

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the comment Macsen.

    There are definitely parallels with Euskadi and probably Catalonia as well. The unitary state governments will do whatever they can, constitutionally and legally, to stifle independence movements. It's a great weapon at their disposal of course that fully federal nations don't really have. I fully expect something similar to happen to Scotland.

    Unitary state governments take these things to heart too much and see break away states as some sort of slight against them or something that would show them up in front of the "great powers".

    However Alex Salmond can try and control the agenda by perhaps offering a multi-choice referendum with a "devolution-max" option. I think a gradualist approach is the right one to take, whether it's Scotland, Wales or any other stateless nation. Voting for independence shouldn't be a dramatic change, it should be as simple as cutting an umbilical cord. Something to embrace as a matter of fact and due process not something to fear.

    ReplyDelete