By LYSIANE GAGNON
Monday, March 14, 2005 Page A13
The Globe and Mail
At this week's Conservative Party policy convention in Montreal, 350 of the 2,000 delegates (17.5 per cent) will be Quebeckers. Although that's a substantial representation, it's a smokescreen since the Conservatives are still going nowhere in Quebec. Despite all his efforts at learning French and trying to build bridges in the province, Stephen Harper is seen as a "foreigner," both personally and ideologically.
This is hardly his fault. For reasons that have more to do with their minority status in Canada than with xenophobia, most Quebec voters seem unable to bond with party leaders who are not francophone, old-stock Quebeckers. At least this is what one can conclude from past experience.
Even though they were controversial in their own province, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chrétien kept a huge following in Quebec in both bad times and good. John Turner didn't have a chance, nor did Joe Clark, even though he spoke French very well and did his best to develop Quebec-friendly policies. Even Paul Martin, who is bilingual and spent all of his adult life in Quebec, is too much of an anglophone to become a popular figure within the French majority.
Brian Mulroney won Quebec twice, but he was not a "real" anglophone. Francophone Quebeckers could identify with him. Not only was he fluently bilingual, but he came from Baie-Comeau. He could joke in French as well as in English, a rare ability that most bilingual people cannot develop. He was a graduate of Laval University, and his best friends were francophones. He had the manners, the warmth, the tastes and the humour of a French Canadian.
Why is the Bloc Québécois so popular? Essentially, because it is a French-Canadian party that speaks only French in the House of Commons and talks almost exclusively about Quebec. Many Quebeckers feel at home with the Bloc. Those are realities against which it is extremely difficult to fight.
In any case, it is an understatement that the Conservatives face an uphill battle in Quebec. Their only allies can be found in Mario Dumont's centre-right Action Démocratique du Québec, but they themselves are rather weak. The ADQ peaks in the polls between elections, when people are angry at the Liberals and fed up with the Parti Québécois, but it never wins more than 20 per cent of the vote.
The Conservatives will not show up on Quebec's radar screen unless they look like they're about to win Ontario and form a national government. Then non-sovereigntist Quebec voters might want to jump on the bandwagon, as they did in 1984 when the polls showed that Mr. Mulroney's Conservatives were heading to victory.
And then, of course, there's the platform. Much of what the Conservatives stand for -- more funding for the military, for example -- are non-issues in Quebec. The Conservatives are against the gun registry, while Quebeckers are in favour. The Conservatives backed Canada's participation in the U.S. missile-defence program, while Quebeckers were against it. The Conservatives want harsher measures against crime, while Quebeckers don't. The Conservatives are socially conservative, while Quebeckers are not. Mr. Harper didn't help himself with his holy war against same-sex marriage. Such stands obscure the positions that could be popular in Quebec, such as his push for more autonomy for the provinces.
But, when the Conservatives try to flirt with Quebec nationalists, they often do so in an awkward way. Who thought of the resolution calling for bilingual health services throughout the country? Such unrealistic wish lists only serve to alienate the West while doing nothing for the party in Quebec.
The Conservatives will gain more visibility by holding their convention in Montreal, but visibility is a two-way street. It remains to be seen whether knowing the Conservatives better will make Quebeckers like them better -- or not.