Towards a return of sovereignist convergence?

Photo: Jacques Boissinot The Canadian Press Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon during question period at the National Assembly in Quebec City on Tuesday, October 8, 2024

Thomas Laberge – The Canadian Press in Quebec City

Published at 11:00 a.m.

• Québec

While the Parti Québécois (PQ) is in first place in voting intentions, its leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon insists that he will hold a referendum in a first mandate even if support for sovereignty stagnates. In this context, is it time to reopen negotiations for a pro-independence convergence between the PQ and Québec solidaire (QS)?? Marc Desnoyers, a former PQ vice-president, says yes. And he is currently publishing the book PQ and QS: Enemy Brothers ? to make his point of view prevail.

Many things are currently separating the PQ and QS. At his National Council in Jonquière last May, the parliamentary leader of Solidarity, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, said that we should not “let Paul St-Pierre Plamondon transform this great and beautiful project that is the independence of Quebec into a referendum against immigration.”

Marc Desnoyers admits that this type of statement does nothing to bring the two sovereignist parties closer together. Despite everything, the author believes that convergence between the two “enemy brothers” is essential to achieving independence. However, he is well aware of the challenges. “I never claimed that it would be a bed of roses,” he said in an interview.

“If QS and the PQ agreed on everything, they would be in the same party and we would not talk about convergence. In the sovereignist movement, there are tendencies on nationalism that are different and that are expressed in opposing and virulent ways,” continues the long-time PQ activist.

He recalls that Mario Dumont's Action démocratique du Québec joined the Yes camp in 1995, even though the political party was very different from the PQ.

“The sovereignist movement, there is a center, a right, a left, and it is through the gathering of these different tendencies that it will be able to achieve its objectives,” maintains Marc Desnoyers.

Autopsy of a failure

In his essay, Marc Desnoyers takes us behind the scenes of the stormy negotiations of the most recent attempt at pro-independence convergence and shows the reasons for its failure. He also wants to highlight the sometimes hidden role of civil society in this attempt at convergence.

200% Deposit Bonus up to €3,000 180% First Deposit Bonus up to $20,000

2011 will be a year of upheaval for the pro-independence movement: the orange wave that hits Quebec; mutiny within the PQ; creation of Option nationale (ON). The Nouveau Mouvement pour le Québec, a sovereignist organization, is also founded.

In 2014, sovereignists come together at the destiNation congress and the Conseil de la souveraine du Québec becomes the United Organizations for the Independence of Quebec (OUI Québec). It is also this last group that will lead the negotiation for a pro-independence “road map” with the PQ, QS, ON and the Bloc Québécois.

The discussions almost came to fruition, but the agreement fell through at the last minute. Whose fault is it? Marc Desnoyers places the blame on the two main pro-independence parties, QS and the PQ.

First of all, QS, where “internal struggles between rival factions” led to a “series of blunders” that ultimately destroyed the agreement.

This debate crystallized at a solidarity convention in 2017, notably with the remarks of activist Dalila Awada who stated that “for racialized communities in Quebec, the enemy is twofold. It is embodied in both neoliberalism and racism. The Parti Québécois, today, carries both of these beasts within it.”

“I think QS really has some blame to take. […] They sent a letter of apology to the negotiators and the other parties to sincerely apologize for the way it happened. They themselves acknowledged this part of the error,” explains Marc Desnoyers in an interview

As for the PQ’s responsibility, the author focuses more on its “political orientations.” “The Parti Québécois, in the decades preceding the convergence, greatly wavered on its fundamental option,” he explains. In his book, he also quotes former premier Jacques Parizeau, who states that with this approach the PQ “ends up looking like hypocrites.”

The scars of this failure have not yet completely healed. Despite everything, Marc Desnoyers believes that it is imperative that QS and the PQ begin discussions on convergence as soon as possible.

“I think it will help give visibility and credibility to the sovereignist option. (…) Recent history shows that when there is a public conversation on the issue of sovereignty, support can increase and it promotes the cohesion of the sovereignist movement,” he explains.

What are we doing with the CAQ?

The author acknowledges that several pitfalls stand in the way of convergence. The PQ and QS do not agree on identity issues and pessimism is still present due to the previous failure.

There is also the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) which is confusing the issue of support for independence, since many sovereignists have found refuge there, despite François Legault's officially federalist (albeit nationalist) stance. According to the latest Léger poll, 37% of CAQ voters could vote “Yes” in a future referendum.

Despite everything, the author does not believe it is necessary to invite the CAQ to participate in the upcoming discussions on convergence.

“We will convince the independentists who support the CAQ by creating a sovereignist movement that is stronger and closer to taking power,” he maintains.

Marc Desnoyers, “PQ and QS: Enemy Brothers ? History of the Independentist Convergence”, Somme toute, 232 pages, release date: October 22, 2024