There are some teachers who leave a lasting impression on us.
Former minister Benoît Pelletier was of this caliber of teacher.
His passion for his subject, constitutional law, not the most thrilling at first glance, was contagious.
Smiling, affable, with a twinkle in his eye, he entered his class at the University of Ottawa dressed in his law professor’s uniform: black moccasins, navy suit and white shirt.
An hour later, he often ended his class, almost out of breath, in his shirt sleeves, with chalk stains all over his face.
We don’t mess with the Constitution.
Sovereigns
Benoît Pelletier, who was minister under Jean Charest from 2003 to 2008, constantly sought to set certain records straight.
He liked to point out that the provinces are not the creatures of the federal government.
They are sovereign in their fields of competence, such as health or education.
But historically, the federal government had been greedy by using its power to tax and spend to encroach on the provinces’ borders.
His defense of Quebec’s autonomy was so firm that his students, including me about fifteen years ago, looked at each other and asked: “Let’s see, has he become a sovereignist?!” »
No, it wasn’t and it never was.
Benoît Pelletier has always believed in Canada’s capacity to accommodate Quebec which could emancipate itself within it.
The problem, according to him, is that the meaning of what makes Canada a federation has been distorted.
Worse, many federalists, after the failure of the 1995 referendum, developed an even more centralizing vision, covering Quebec with maple leaves, in the hope of putting an end to the separatists.
For them, there can only be one nation, the Canadian one.
Orthodox
These “orthodox” federalists wanted to “entrust the greatest number of powers to the Parliament of Canada rather than to the provinces,” he said at the microphone of Michel Langevin, at 104.7 Outaouais.
Photo pool, Le Droit, Simon Séguin-Bertrand
In this astonishing interview given a few weeks before his death, Benoît Pelletier took the full measure of his ideological distance from the PLQ. He thereby expressed the feeling of many Quebecers who deserted this party.
In this context, didn’t he want to jump into the arena again, at a time when the PLQ is looking for a new leader capable of reconnecting with the French speakers of Quebec?
His response was sharp, and it deserves to be quoted at length:
“I am far too nationalist for the Liberal Party of Quebec. In reality, this party sometimes maintains a unitary vision of Canada, rather than a truly federalist one. This is the case for several members, it is also the case for some deputies. »
“When I was in politics, I promoted the recognition of Quebec as a nation and I was often told: “Benoît, there is only one nation in Canada, and it is the Canadian nation”. In other words, from the outset there was, privately and behind the scenes, on the part of a significant number of members and deputies, a denial of the existence of a Quebec nation. »
“These federalists were so closed in their conception of federalism that they even came to deny the possibility of a Quebec nation existing alongside the Canadian nation. »
A new Coderre
This is the whole dilemma of the current PLQ. Quebecers have gone elsewhere.
The polls are clear, the repatriation of new powers to Quebec is popular.
Which Quebec politician today would dare to publicly deny the existence of a Quebec nation?
Even Denis Coderre now calls himself a “proud nationalist”, even though he has spent the last 40 years fighting this idea.
Real conversion or opportunism?
Benoît Pelletier remained “doubtful” about the emergence of this new Coderre.
Professor Pelletier, who put the country before the party, knew how to separate fact from falsehood when it came to the best interests of Quebec.
We will miss its lights.
