Québec Solidaire Should Take a Principled Stand, Not One Informed by the Canadian Constitution
On October 12, the Journal de Québec published an article under the headline "If possible, Québec solidaire will not swear allegiance to the new King of England."
The
article makes it clear that Québec Solidaire (QS) is
hiding behind "the decisions of the National Assembly" that are based
on the Canadian Constitution which, in turn, states that King
Charles III is the "King of Canada" and its head of state and that,
therefore, elected members of Canada's legislatures, including the
Quebec National Assembly, must swear allegiance to him.
"Québec solidaire MNAs will not swear allegiance to the British Crown if the official request of the Parti Québécois is accepted by the National Assembly. Having tried it before, however, the Québec solidaire spokesperson doubts the PQ approach [will succeed]," writes the Journal de Québec.
The article quotes QS co-spokesperson Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois:
"If it is possible, of course we want to avoid it. It's important for me to point out that Mr. Plamondon's approach, although I completely respect it, has already been attempted by Québec solidaire. There are several sovereigntist MNAs since the 1970s who tried to do what Mr. Plamondon did. And unfortunately, the institution that is the National Assembly, no matter who governed it, remained very firm on this issue. We learned this ourselves the hard way."
Nadeau-Dubois then describes what QS did in the past regarding this mandatory oath to the British monarch:
"In 2018, we had tried not to take the oath to the Queen and the National Assembly had been very clear with us, maintaining that it was impossible to sit. So, we had introduced a bill to make this oath to the Crown optional. Unfortunately, Dominique Anglade's Liberals blocked it."
The facts are that in 2018, the ten Québec solidaire MNAs took the oath to the people of Quebec in public in the Legislative Council Chamber of the National Assembly (the room where parliamentary committees are held, for example), commonly called the Red Room, and they took the oath to the Queen in private in a room adjacent to the Red Room. This is even worse. Hiding, avoiding the gaze of the nation to discreetly swear the oath to the Queen of England in private, does not bode well for the future.
The bill referred to by Nadeau-Dubois was introduced on February 28, 2019 by QS MNA Sol Zanetti, MNA for Jean-Lesage, who was re-elected in that same riding on October 3.
Entitled An Act to recognize the Members' oath to the people of Québec as the sole oath required for Members to take office, Bill 192 recognized this oath as the only compulsory oath when MNAs are sworn in. It provided that the National Assembly establishes the oath that the Members must take to be able to sit in the Assembly and that it alone has the authority to designate the person who may administer the oath.
According to somewhat confusing media reports, the CAQ government took three years to agree to put the bill on the Notice Paper. In June 2022, as the end of the parliamentary session approached and all-party support was needed to speed up the process to bring the bill to a vote, the Liberals objected.
The Journal de Québec article quotes Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois talking about the oath to the British Crown:
"It is a practice that is totally outdated and archaic. As sovereignists, the Québec solidaire members have never enjoyed taking an oath to the Queen."
Unfortunately for Québec solidaire, this position does not explain why it does not have the acumen to take advantage of the historical conjuncture presented by the death of Queen Elizabeth and the evidence of the medieval and colonialist nature of the constitutional arrangements imposed on Canada and Quebec, to take a principled stand and demand that the CAQ government do the same. All call themselves nationalists and sovereignists. The majority of Quebeckers have already spoken out against this archaic institution that is maintained at their expense. It is time to take a stand, not to ask British constitutional institutions if they will deign to give us the right to take a stand!
The Journal de Québec article reminds us that Québec solidaire MNAs will be sworn in before the PQ. Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois said he "hopes that the National Assembly will have given a clear directive to all parties by then."
"I hope that all parties are treated equally," said the co-spokesperson of Québec solidaire.
Is this the "solidarity" Québec solidaire stands for?
In other words, they are waiting for a directive from the National Assembly that would allow them not to take the oath to the king. This is very different from the position of the PQ members, who say they will not swear the oath to the king and who ask the National Assembly not to take action against them but say they are prepared to face the consequences. The leader of the PQ is defending a coherent position based on a democratic principle that defends both the sovereignty of Quebec and the National Assembly. What does the Québec solidaire position defend? For the moment, it is not clear at all. Defeatism will not encourage anyone to support Québec solidaire if it continues to take positions like this with respect to the anti-social agenda of the CAQ government.
At some point, one cannot continue to be a happiness of larks. One has to take a principled position and actually enter the battle without hoping for permission from the very institution which is designed not to give it.
No to Pragmatism!
Yes to the Defence of Principles!
(Translated from the original French by TML. Graphic PMLQ)
This article was published in
Volume 52 Number 29 - October 14, 2022
Article Link:
https://cpcml.ca/Tmld2022/Articles/D520292.HTM
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca