Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Tech & Science

Speech by Québec Premier Lucien Bouchard

Speech by Québec Premier Lucien Bouchard Announcing His Resignation As Premier Of Québec
Thursday, January 11, 2001
National Assembly,
Québec City,

Fellow Quebecers,

I have devoted the Christmas holidays to a profound reflection on my commitment to public life. This respite has allowed me, above all, to take stock of the effectiveness of my contribution to the promotion of sovereignty.

I have decided to end my participation in public affairs and resign from my position as Premier of Québec.

It is with pride that I have performed my duties over the past five years. Despite what the task demands in terms of energy, open-mindedness and endurance, assuming this role has given me a great deal of satisfaction. It is not my intention today to review the government’s achievements. Suffice it to say that my government has set Québec on a new course as regards public finances, the economy, taxation, health care, education, social progress, and municipal organization. I think you will admit that I have never hesitated to face problems squarely and that I have always sought to advance Québec’s interests, with a constant concern to be the Premier of all Quebecers. I said that I would accept the challenge and I believe that I have done so to the best of my abilities.

For more than 10 years, I have waged through elective office the struggle for sovereignty. I must acknowledge that the outcome of my efforts is less convincing as successes have alternated with setbacks. I have tried to take stock of my efforts to achieve Québec’s sovereignty since I became the leader of the Parti Québécois without complacency. For, in addition to his obligations as Premier, a party leader is bound by the political commitments he shares with his party. In the case of the Parti Québécois, the first commitment is to achieve Québec’s sovereignty.

It is to contribute to the building of a sovereign Québec that I founded a party in the House of Commons, where it formed the Official Opposition. The same struggle propelled me, with all the persuasion and determination that I could muster, into the 1995 referendum campaign, at Jacques Parizeau’s side.

I set myself the same goal when I assumed the party leadership in 1996. We had just come out of a referendum campaign that brought us to the threshold of a new country. It is true that bitter disappointment followed on referendum night the exaltation that the near certainty of victory had instilled in us. Nonetheless, the sovereignist advance was such that it justified our hope of soon reaching our objective. I still recall the image of the enthusiastic crowds no hall could contain in the final weeks of the campaign. I relived the solidarity of the Parti Québécois, the Bloc Québécois, the ADQ and other partners in the camp dedicated to change. I told myself that this splendid momentum, which had brought the Québec people so close to their goal, would once again and very soon spur them onward.

This is not the time for lengthy analyses, but the fact is these hopes have not yet been fulfilled.

We were undoubtedly faced immediately thereafter with pressing problems. We no doubt succeeded in reaching the consensuses that enabled us to curb Québec’s chronic deficit, revitalize Montréal’s and the regions’ economies, and create jobs that, among other things, have allowed many welfare recipients to rejoin the labour market.

However, as has been rightly noted, we did not succeed for all that in bolstering sovereignist fervour.

Should the assumption of our government obligations inevitably delay the achievement of sovereignty? On the one hand, the public interest and the responsibilities we were entrusted with compelled us to turn around Québec’s economic and financial situation. On the other hand, we clearly saw that by putting our house in order, we would make the edification of a sovereign Québec more credible. I believed, and still believe, that one of the best ways to convince the Québec people of their ability to govern themselves, with all the necessary resources and powers, is to demonstrate concretely the potential of Quebecers and their government. By ending 40 years of deficits, restoring the credibility of our financial management, reducing unemployment to its lowest rate in a quarter of a century, firmly entering the new economy and emphasizing social progress, have we not placed the political future Quebecers will choose on a more solid footing?

Having said that, I recognize that my efforts to quickly rekindle the debate on the national question have been in vain. Therefore, it was not possible to launch a referendum within the short time frame we anticipated. Moreover, Quebecers have remained astonishingly unmoved by federal offensives such as the social union, the millennium scholarship program, the establishment of university research chairs, and the adoption of Bill C-20, which seeks nothing less than to restrict our ability to choose our political future. In any event, if there was any discontent, the outcome of the last federal election hardly reflected it.

Yet, the issues are more pressing than ever. It is essential to shake up our open indifference to the threat of asphyxia raised by the fiscal imbalance between the two levels of government. It is important to show how precarious the balance in Québec’s public finances remains. While Ottawa keeps garnering surpluses, Québec is weighed down by growing expenditures, with revenues that clearly cannot increase commensurately. Combined with the brutal and innumerable federal intrusions into our fields of jurisdiction, this situation will inexorably prevent the Québec government from funding its essential missions. This in turn will make us more vulnerable to the designs of a federal government bent on denying the existence of the Québec people and curtailing their government’s scope of activities. This threat is imminent and weighs upon us all, regardless of our allegiance.

I fully accept my share of responsibility for failing to revive the flame and make Quebecers aware of the seriousness of the situation. And I draw, for my part, the inevitable conclusions.

Two or three years remain of this government’s mandate. I have reconciled myself to allowing members of the Parti Québécois the possibility of electing a leader, who, better than me, can shore up the party’s political activism, intensify the Québec people’s sense of identity and further the cause of sovereignty, the only project that can offer Quebecers a promising future. All of this depends on the revitalization of the sovereignty project, which can only be achieved in close keeping with René Lévesque’s legacy, i.e. in a spirit of democratic respect, generosity and openness toward everyone, regardless of ethnic and cultural origin. I see my departure as an opportunity to engage in a fundamental debate, as many hope, and even as a way of renewing the party.

I have confidence in the future of Quebecers because I know that, individually and collectively, they are capable of great things.

Let me add that, although it is not a cause for my departure, I have no desire to engage in any kind of discussion about the Holocaust and the vote of ethnic and cultural communities. I still can’t figure out how the language debate managed to shift to a comparative count of the suffering of the Jewish people and the intolerance some Québec citizens allegedly display by not voting for Québec sovereignty.

As was to be expected, statements of this sort have harmed Québec’s reputation abroad. And here, they certainly have not improved the ability of sovereignists to convince those they are directed at. We might also assume that such remarks would outrage those members of the communities concerned who have already shown openness, or even adhered to the success of the sovereignty project. I am convinced that, without the National Assembly’s intervention, the damage would have been much greater.

This is why I was taken aback by the protests sparked by the National Assembly’s unanimous resolution on the unacceptable nature of the remarks that launched this strange, dangerous debate.

Scores of public figures have signed a public condemnation of the National Assembly’s resolution and others have endorsed their initiative.

Some are suggesting negotiation. This matter goes well beyond the management of sporadic problems a party leader should be able to resolve through flexibility and compromise. Where the issues involve principles, there is no room for negotiation. This, unquestionably, is a core issue. First, I declare that Quebecers, without distinction, may exercise their right to vote as they see fit, without being accused of intolerance. Second, I declare that the Holocaust is the supreme crime, a systematic attempt to eliminate a people, a negation of human conscience and dignity. Jews cannot be blamed for being traumatized by it. This unspeakable tragedy suffers no comparison.

A supposedly hardened politician may perhaps be forgiven for feeling personally hurt upon hearing the reasons for his support of the National Assembly’s resolution qualified as Dupplesism and pettiness.

Emotions notwithstanding, I persist in believing that the members of the National Assembly, a democratic forum par excellence, only exercised their most basic right of free speech by dissociating themselves from the remarks in question and declaring them unacceptable. It was wrong to see this as an act of censorship. Parliamentarians acted with the strictest legitimacy in distancing themselves from remarks that irresponsibly call into question fundamental democratic values. Government MNAs had to take a stand all the more since the instigator of this controversy is seeking to join them.

I fail to understand how some can acknowledge the unacceptable nature of such remarks from an avowed Parti Québécois candidate and, in the same breath, deplore the National Assembly’s resolution. If the remarks in question are unacceptable to members of the Parti Québécois, they cannot be more acceptable to members of the National Assembly.

I have no doubt that, should their author follow up on his intention, Parti Québécois members will block his candidacy in Mercier.

I wish to express my gratitude to my fellow Quebecers for the trust they have shown in granting me the privilege of serving them.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart to voters in Jonquière and to the grass roots militants of this riding who welcomed me with open arms. It is with sadness that I must relinquish the mandate they have given me. I would like to express my sincere thanks to all members of the Parti Québécois. I will remember their admirable commitment and genuine selflessness.

I must also emphasize the work and efforts of members of the National Assembly on behalf of their constituents. The Speaker of the National Assembly, Jean-Pierre Charbonneau, MNA for Borduas, has always performed his duties with respect for our institutions, and I thank him for it.

To my colleagues in the party caucus, I reiterate my attachment and recognition for the solid and affectionate support they have given me throughout our journey together. Without them, nothing the government has accomplished would have been possible. I have consistently been provided with wise counsel and invigorating encouragement from my colleagues.

There are no words to express what I owe my cabinet colleagues. How can I recall, without deep emotion, the innumerable hours we have spent together searching for solutions to so many thorny problems? At all times, they have displayed unwavering solidarity and unforgettable generosity toward me. I wish to assure them of my friendship.

The time has come to conclude. I will relinquish my duties as Premier of Québec and MNA for Jonquière. At the request of the party caucus, the resignations will take effect once the Parti Québécois has filled the president’s position. I will, therefore, remain in office for the transition. As of today, I am resigning as leader of the Parti Québécois to enable the party to set in motion the process of finding a successor.

I have been actively involved in politics for nearly 13 years. These years have brought me many rewards, but they have also taken their toll. My only regret is not to have done better and more and, above all, not to have realized my dream for our collective future, the achievement of the new Québec nation. I have devoted to this cause all of my passion and strength. If in the process I inadvertently offended opponents or anyone else, I wish to apologize sincerely and assure them that I never did so out of meanness or lack of respect.

I thank Providence for my excellent health. I celebrated my 62nd birthday while pondering my future. Our years are numbered and I have a young family, all the more precious since it came late in life. Audrey has given more than I can ever give her in return. I also want to fully experience the marvellous adventure of educating my sons, who are 11 and 9. Alexandre and Simon need me. And I need to get back to all of them and devote to them from now on the best of my energy and time.

Thank you.

You may also like:

World

Immigration is a symptom of a much deeper worldwide problem.

Business

Traveling in NY is already costly, but it just got worse: transit authorities have approved a controversial $15 toll, set to take effect in...

Entertainment

The Swedish city of Malmo is preparing to host the Eurovision Song Contest in early May under high security.

Tech & Science

A look at the sector that could help annually boost the global economy by $1 trillion