46
Owning the National Question in Quebec
Richard Nadeau
Department of Political Science
Université de Montréal
Paper prepared for the annual conference of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties (EPOP), Edinburg, Scotland, September 12th-14th.
This paper seeks to determine to what extent the “Quebec question” is at the heart of political dynamics in Quebec. By this, we mean the debates surrounding not only the political status of the province in the Canadian federation, but also surrounding the protection and promotion of the identity and culture of the province’s Francophone majority population. By “political dynamics”, we mean the link between Quebecers’ opinions on the future of their province and the protection of their culture and support for one of the four big political parties in Quebec.
There has been much work done on the relation between Quebecers’ constitutional preferences and the political choices they have made over the past few decades (see Bélanger and Nadeau 2009a for an overview). We intend to contribute to this body of academic literature by pushing theoretical reflection and empirical analysis a little farther with regard to the meaning of the “national question” in Quebec and its impact on partisan dynamics within the province. First, we will present our theoretical framework. Then, we will examine the link between Quebecers’ constitutional preferences and their vote choice during the April 7 2014 elections. The results of these analyses clearly show that the national question is very much at the heart of the political game in Quebec and that all parties must position themselves with regard to this issue if they wish to be electorally competitive in the province.
The National Question in Quebec
The first question is to establish whether the national question in Quebec, in all of its forms, constitutes a niche issue for just one party in particular or a central issue that structures the party system. An essential distinction has to be made from this perspective concerning the nature of this issue in federal and provincial elections in Quebec. In the case of federal elections, this issue clearly has the characteristics of a niche issue (Bélanger and Nadeau 2006, 2009b). One political party, the Bloc québécois, has made defending the interests of Quebec and promoting the province’s political independence its central (if not only) goal. The slogans used by this party, which has never run candidates outside of Quebec, are in and of themselves revealing. In 1993, when it first contested federal elections, the Bloc québécois asked voters to give themselves “true power” (le vrai pouvoir). A decade later, thanks to a whimsical play on words in French, this same party ran in an election dominated by the issue of corruption under the slogan of “a parti propre au Québec”.
The political positioning of the other parties on the federal scene is revealing. The Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party, and the Green Party all present themselves as “national” parties, as opposed to the Bloc québécois, which presents itself as a regional party. The statewide parties field candidates in all provinces including Quebec and also present themselves as parties with a comprehensive political platform. This includes, most notably, relations between the federal government and the provinces.
The parallels between Quebec and the prevailing situation in the United Kingdom are quite clear. Like the Bloc québécois, the Scottish National Party has also used the Scottish “national question” as a niche issue during national elections. It has only presented candidates in Scotland and its role has essentially consisted of making Scotland’s concerns known at Westminster. In this case, as with the Lega Nord in Italy, the national question, or even the interests of a particular region within a country, is exploited as a niche issue that allows a party to occupy a specific niche and win votes by defining itself as the party that defends the interests of a particular nation or region.
The political dynamics play out differently at the sub-national level, where questions of regional identity and interests are much more important. In these regions, this question, far from a mere niche issue, often becomes the fundamental political cleavage around which all political parties position themselves. In moving from the national to the regional level, this issue evolves from being niche to one of the mainstream pillars of electoral politics; on the regional level, it is an inevitable question and all parties must have an official stance on it (Bélanger and Nadeau 2009a; Bechhoffer and McCrone 2010; Hepburn 2014). This situation is clear in the case of Quebec. The Quebec question is clearly a niche issue when it is debated on the national scene, but at the same time is also the dominant cleavage in Quebec provincial elections.
A second key question is to ask if this issue has the characteristics of a “valence issue”, that is, an issue around which public opinion is massively in agreement (Stokes 1963; Stokes and Dilulio 1993). The question of the economy is often presented as the valence issue par excellence in that all (or almost all) voters can agree on lowering unemployment and maintaining price stability. Can we say in the same vein that the national question in Quebec is a valence issue? In the eyes of Quebec voters, do all provincial political parties have to defend the region’s interests, identity, and language? Are all provincial parties judged with regard to whether they are working towards these goals or their ability to do so? Past research has shown that parties that want to differentiate themselves on a valence issue must show that they are the most determined and competent party to reach these goals (Bélanger and Meguid 2008; Walgrave, Lefevere and Tresch 2012). Is this useful to understand Quebec public opinion and the factors that are the most important in Quebec voters’ political choices?
The answer to this question is complex. In order to understand the answer, we must first turn to work that has shown that the issue of the “national question” consists of many dimensions. One of these dimensions has to do with the idea that any government in power in the regional capital, be it Québec City or Edinburgh, must vigorously defend the interests of this region. This defense can take several forms. It can consist of simply defending the prerogatives of the regional parliament against any encroachment by the national parliament. It can also mean ensuring that the region obtains its fair share of the national wealth through equalization payments or other mechanisms of fiscal federalism. Defending regional interests can also mean demanding that some powers be transferred from the central government to the regional government in order to allow regional-level elected representatives to better respond to the needs of their population. Finally, it can consist of defending the region’s distinct economic and social model. It is along this objective of defending regional interests that the national question truly takes on the characteristics of a valence issue. All regional-level political parties must have a clear stance on this question and show that they will vehemently and effectively defend the interests of their region (Nadeau et al 2000; Bélanger and Meguid 2008; Bélanger and Nadeau 2009b).
A second dimension to the issue of the national question has to do with promoting the specific identity of a particular region. This question is particularly relevant in Quebec, due to the precariousness of the French language on the North American continent (Blais, Martin and Nadeau 1995; Nadeau and Fleury 1995). That Quebecers believe they have a distinct identity that should be protected and promoted by their regional government is largely undisputed (Blais and Nadeau 1992; Martin and Nadeau 2001; Bélanger and Perrella 2008). Thus, the question of protecting and promoting Quebecer identity is largely consensual and all parties must subscribe to this objective. That said, political parties in Quebec, while supporting this general goal, can sometimes disagree on the means necessary to arrive at these ends. This was particularly apparent during past debates over language laws in Quebec and more recently during the debate over the adoption of the Quebec Charter of Values, a proposal which would have affirmed the secular nature of Quebec society.
If it seems that there is a consensus among all parties in the province regarding the defense of Quebec’s interests and identity, this is not the case for promoting different constitutional options for Quebec. One could even say that this issue has the characteristics of a “positional” issue. The case of Quebec is very telling in this regard. For the past forty years, Quebecers have been divided along two constitutional options. The first option is political independence and is spearheaded by the Parti québécois, but also endorsed by Québec solidaire. The second option is keeping Quebec in the Canadian federation and the Quebec Liberal Party has been the most outspoken for this option (the fourth most important party in Quebec, the Coalition Avenir Québec also supports a federalist position, but is more nationalist than the Quebec Liberal Party).
The opposition between federalists and sovereignists (or independentists) is the dominant cleavage in Quebec political life. All political parties in the province must have a clear position on this question (i.e. federalist or sovereignist) and those who decide to take a middle-of-the-road position are often accused of either eluding the question or being confused about their own stance. This dividing line with regard to constitutional options is often more important than the line between left and right (Nadeau, Guérin and Martin 1995). From this point of view, the dynamics of Quebec politics are unique in the Canadian federation.
Hypotheses
What can we conclude from this brief overview of the role that the national question plays on electoral dynamics in Quebec? The first conclusion is that this question is a “super issue” in Quebec. More so than left-right divides or partisan identification, it is the main factor that structures political dynamics in Quebec (Bélanger and Nadeau 2009a). The second conclusion is that the national question is in and of itself multidimensional, having both “valence” and “positional” characteristics. Defending regional interests and affirming a distinct identity are dimensions around which there largely exists a consensus and political parties differentiate themselves not by taking radically different positions, but rather by showing a more or less levels of engagement and determination to achieve these objectives. The logic that prevails in these two cases brings in issues of spatial voting. As such, the Quebec Liberal Party, which is the most federalist party in Quebec, will declare its willingness to defend Quebec and its culture, but will generally do so with less vigour than the other parties (and less than the Parti québécois, in particular). Thus, each party should subscribe to the consensus surrounding these questions without straying too far from the position of the median voter in Quebec, who has nationalist tendencies. Thus, the political game in Quebec on these dimensions of the national question is clear. It is in the strategic interest of the most nationalist party in Quebec that questions of identity and language remain at the forefront during an election and it is in the interest of the other parties that these same concerns take up less space on the political agenda.
The political dynamic is entirely different for the third dimension of the national question: constitutional preferences. For the past few years, Quebec public opinion has been on the side of the federalists. It is for this reason that the Quebec Liberal Party, otherwise discreet on the question of defending Quebec’s interests and identity, has put constitutional issues at the heart of its electoral campaigns. It is also for this same reason that the Parti québécois, who often brandishes defending Quebec’s interests and identity during electoral campaigns, has said relatively little about sovereignty. The other parties, less engaged in the opposition between federalism and sovereignty, would benefit from this question being removed from the political debate all together and voters’ attention being drawn to other issues.
The preceding section allows us to suggest some hypotheses that will be tested using data from an online survey carried out in Quebec in the weeks before the April 7, 2014 elections that brought the Quebec Liberal Party into power (details about the survey are in the Appendix). The hypotheses are the following:
1. The most nationalist party in Quebec, the Parti québécois, is perceived as being the most adept at defending Quebec’s interests, language, and culture. This advantage is due to the fact that the majority of the population has nationalist sensibilities and will be especially marked among Francophone voters.
2. The party most opposed to Quebec independence, the Quebec Liberal Party, will dominate the constitutional preferences dimension of the national question. This advantage is due to the fact that the majority of the population favours keeping the province within the Canadian federation.
3. Support for parties dominating one of the dimensions of the national question, the Parti québécois or the Quebec Liberal Party, is linked to this issue more so than it is support for any other party. Thus, support for the Parti québécois and the Quebec Liberal Party is tied to a) the importance voters themselves give to the national question, b) their feelings of attachment and identification towards Quebec and Canada, c) their evaluations of the costs and benefits of the various constitutional options, and d) their own constitutional preferences.