Quebec general election, 2003
In the Quebec general election on April 14, 2003, the Quebec Liberal Party under Jean Charest defeated the incumbent Parti Québécois under Bernard Landry.
Unfolding
In 2002, having been in power for two mandates and seen as worn-out by some, the Parti Québécois (PQ) governement saw its poll numbers fall sharply (placing third at its lowest point) and an important part of its support go to the Action Démocratique du Québec (ADQ) and his young leader, Mario Dumont, and some to the Parti libéral du Québec (PLQ). Bernard Landry, leader of the PQ, underwent a revitalization of the party and its image. Helped by the ideas of the ADQ becoming more and more unpopular as its conservative nature was uncovered, by social democratic measures taken by the PQ government like the passing of the Law against poverty, and the unpopularity of PLQ leader Jean Charest, the Parti Québécois succeded in gaining back popularity in the beginning of 2004 to become again number one in polls.
The 2003 Quebec election itself happened over the backdrop of the war in Irak. The very battles took place during the first half of the campaign, diverting the attention of the media and the population. Bernard Landry became known for his custom of wearing the white ribbon (which was in 2003 Quebec worn by people in favor of peace). This custom was shortly followed by the two other main party leaders, Jean Charest and Mario Dumont. Landry was the most outspoken critic of the war. The other two were more discreet on the matter, Charest once stating that it was an opportunity to reaffirm his belief in peace and Dumont acting in a similar way, while also addressing criticism to Landry, saying that Quebecers should refrain from criticizing Americans too harshly, Americans being historical friends of Quebecers.
The desire for change was considered an important factor of the campaign (see Change sub-section of Issues, below). However, while reminding the fundamental change at the core of its primary ideal of sovereignty, the PQ focused its message and publicity not on change, but on stability (as it is apparent in its slogan; see the Campaign slogans section below). Landry also painted the vote as a choice between the left of the PQ and two parties of the right. The PLQ painted itself as centrist, something that would, after its election, be contested by the massive opposition to his government. The PLQ produced dynamic ads and material, and released a new, younger logo. The ADQ put forward its young, underdog leader and denied being too much to the right. It first broadcast a negative advertisement (a bleak television spot speaking of deaths in the hospitals) that backfired substantially, with criticism from opponents and citizens. It shortly released a brighter, more positive publicity.
Despite an impressive PQ comeback, Charest managed to play his cards well enough to appear as a viable alternative for people in desire of change (especially during the Leaders' Debate). Also, the Parizeau Affair that Charest himself sparked is said to have harmed Landry's campaign up to election day. The PQ advance vanished mid-campaign. The Parti Québécois won a respectable number of seats, but the Parti Libéral won the election. The Action démocratique du Québec under Mario Dumont won four seats, which was a considerable improvement from previous general elections, but nonetheless an important disappointment since the party had five sitting members as a result of by-election victories in the previous year and a quite high standing in the polls of that same year. This was the first general election for the new Union des forces progressistes. A documentary about Bernard Landry's point of view of the campaign was released in 2003 called À Hauteur d'homme. It was directed by Jean-Claude Labrecque.
Issues
- Healthcare: Jean Charest and the PLQ centered their campaign upon the issue of healthcare and reducing waiting lists. The other major parties criticized Charest for planning to only invest in healthcare and education while freezing other budgets. Landry supported that money for healthcare would be available with the fiscal imbalance solved by sovereignty and vowed to fight for money from Ottawa until then, as he had done earlier that year (see the Fiscal imbalance section below). Charest painted Landry as putting sovereignty ahead of healthcare and presented his party as the one which would consider la santé (health) its first priority. He also accused Landry personally of using waiting lists as an administration procedure for hospitals.
- Change: The desire for change was considered a major deciding factor of the vote by the media. It was criticized by some citizens and the PQ itself as wanting change for the sake of change, since the government had ended its term with an economy doing well and high satisfaction polls for an outgoing administration. Landry reminded that, while voting for his party did not change the government right away, the first ideal of the PQ, sovereignty, was the greatest of changes. At the Leaders' Debate, Charest stated to the viewers that those in desire of change should vote for the PLQ since A vote for the ADQ is a vote for the PQ. At the time, the ADQ was considered too low in the polls to be a potential victor. This reminder of Charest of the spoiler effect is said to have partly helped his final precedence upon voting day.
- Income tax: Jean Charest presented a plan of major reduction of income tax, which Bernard Landry opposed. Quebec's income taxes are the highest in North America, but its social programs are also relatively generous and the gap between rich and poor is the lowest of the North American continent. The ADQ presented a flat tax plan in 2002. This proved to be highly unpopular and contributed to the image of the party as too much conservative. This plan, in its pure form, was dropped in the beginning of 2003, the ADQ claiming that, after further examination, the Quebec government did not have the resources to implement it. This, again, hurt the party further, now additionally giving it the image of flip flopper.
- State size and intervention: The PQ government was criticized by the two other major parties for maintaining a supposedly overly big state size and for practicing statism. Dumont spoke of Landry and the PQ's Social bureaucracy, a pun on Social democracy the PQ defends. Landry responded to Charest and Dumont that Quebecers do not want less state, they want better state. Dumont initially presented a drastic project of reduction of civil servants, something that was also softened before the campaign.
- Four day week plan. This project was destined to have Quebec employers required to offer the option of a week of four workdays to parents. This was presented by the PQ not only as a way to enhance family life and lower the stress and load on parents' shoulders, but also as a way of counteracting the natality crisis of Quebec (since the Quiet Revolution, Quebec has a low rate of natality). The plan was attacked by the PLQ and ADQ for its perceived improvisation, having been only presented around the beginning of the election. It did gather some interest and support within the population, enough for Charest to declare, days before voting day, that an eventual government of his could consider implementing such a four day week, although such a thing has not been mentioned again by the PLQ since its election.
- Fiscal imbalance: The theory of a fiscal imbalance between Ottawa and Quebec City was held by all major parties, which all denounced the situation. Charest defended that the cooperative approach of a federalist party like the PLQ would be more efficient at solving the problematic. As proof that the PQ was apt to solve the Fiscal imbalance, Landry pointed to his success of early 2003, when he, along with the English Canadian Premiers, managed to come to an agreement with Prime Minister of Canada Jean Chrétien for more money to finance healthcare. He promised to continue the battle to solve the imbalance until the eventual victory of independence.
- City mergers: The PQ government had merged the major cities of Quebec under the leadership of Lucien Bouchard, Bernard Landry's predecessor. Its major arguments for the move was a better repartition of the wealth and responsibilities between richer suburban communities and poorer parts of the main cities. The merging having occured despite a high opposition of some of the past cities, a certain number of citizens were disgruntled, especially amongst the upper class and the anglophone community. The PLQ proposed to submit the mergers to popular demerger referendums, if enough people in the former city wished one to be held. The PQ and the ADQ strongly opposed the idea.
- Sovereignty and autonomy: While the usual arguments remained for its completition (dignity, culture, globalization, etc.), sovereignty was also presented by the PQ as a way to solve the fiscal imbalance problematic. The ADQ took great effort at not pronouncing itself on the subject of independence, in order to attract both sides of the National Question spectrum, thus offering a third way to Quebecers, between radical separation and knelt down federalism, as Mario Dumont put it himself. The ADQ worked in favor of sovereignty during the 1995 Quebec referendum but remained nebulous on the subject ever since. The PLQ criticized the PQ for having politics of confrontation because of its ideal and defended that a PLQ government would take back the role of leader of Quebec in the federation. Landry promised a third referendum on independence in 1000 days, confirming the plan established by him at the Declaration of Gatineau. An argument of Landry for this timetable was that he wanted Quebec to be present at the Summit of the Americas of Buenos Aires, in 2005 (representation for Quebec had been denied by Ottawa at the previous summit held in the very National Capital of Quebec, an act that angered many). At the same time, Landry kept the door opened to federalist support for the PQ and stated that he would only hold a referendum if he had the moral assurance of winning it. This lead Charest to accuse him of having a hidden agenda, during the Leaders' Debate.
- Parizeau Affair: On the day of the Leaders' Debate, Charest was presented, by his entourage, with an article from the website of the Trois-Rivieres newspaper Le Nouvelliste. It spoke of past PQ leader Jacques Parizeau reiterating his controversial statement of his 1995 referendum concession speech. This assessment was later found to not be entierly true (although it is debated). Despite the nebulous aspect of this premilinary web article, Charest surprised Landry with it during the Leaders' Debate, on live television. This resulted with a new controversy that ran for some days following the debate, and was said to have hurt Landry's campaign. A strategy of the PQ was to denounce Charest's act as an immoral attack on a person's reputation and dignity (Parizeau), since the conclusion that he had repeated his comments was seen as hasty and ultimately wrong, but the strategy arguably did not work well enough to counter the controversy. The aftermath of the Leaders' Debate is thoroughly treated in the À Hauteur d'homme documentary.
- five dollar daycare centers implemented by the PQ government of Lucien Bouchard (with Landry as Minister of Finance), was one of the most appreciated achievements of the recent PQ administration. Some parents still did not have access to it however (because of a lack of sufficient places), and Landry vowed to continue creating more. Charest presented his team as the most apt for such a task. He also vowed to keep the price at five dollars a day. This promise would be broken later that year by the Charest government. See Opposition to the Charest government.
- Public debt: The Action Démocratique insisted on the necessity, for the Quebec state, to progressively pay the public debt. The other major leaders did not see it as a priority.
Contenders
See also: List of political parties in Quebec
Major parties
Action démocratique du Québec
-
Parti Libéral du Québec
-
Parti Québécois
-
Minor parties
Bloc Pot
-
Union des forces progressistes
-
Campaign slogans
Election results
| Party | Votes | % of vote | Total |
|---|
| Parti libéral du Québec | 1,754,378 | 45.9% | 76 |
|---|
| Parti Québécois | 1,268,911 | 33.2% | 45 |
|---|
| Action démocratique du Québec | 697,017 | 18.2% | 4 |
|---|
| Union des forces progressistes | 40,861 | 1.1% | 0 |
|---|
| Bloc pot | 23,141 | 0.6% | 0 |
|---|
| Parti vert du Québec | 17,076 | 0.4% | 0 |
|---|
| Independent | 7,243 | 0.2% | 0 |
|---|
| Equality Party | 4,339 | 0.1% | 0 |
|---|
| Parti démocratie chrétienne du Québec | 3,575 | 0.1% | 0 |
|---|
| Parti marxiste-léniniste du Québec | 2,941 | 0.1% | 0 |
|---|
| Unaffiliated | 1,407 | 0.0% | 0 |
|---|
See also
