This week, that hint became a veiled threat, with Legault rhetorically asking if a referendum was necessary to convince Trudeau that most “Quebecers are saying it doesn’t make sense (to allow) 560,000 immigrants” to come to Quebec. “Will we hold a referendum on (getting full power over immigration) eventually? Will we do it more broadly, on other subjects?” Legault asked.
It may be just bluster and politics, baring his nationalist teeth in a duel with Ottawa as a hedge against the resurgent separatist Parti Québécois. But if in desperation Legault goes down that path, imagine the nightmare of a referendum on immigration. Regardless of the question, it could easily morph into an ugly and divisive debate and almost certainly spiral into international headlines associating Quebec with anti-immigrant sentiment and xenophobia.
Legault says Quebec “will always be welcoming” toward immigrants, but “our capacity to receive has been exceeded.” He’s not entirely wrong. However, working with Ottawa collaboratively to make gains would be a winning strategy to short-circuit the PQ — while ramping up a confrontation with talk of a referendum to appease nationalists would put Legault in a lose-lose scenario in practical terms.
His governing Coalition Avenir Québec and the separatist PQ and Québec solidaire would all be together on the Yes side of a referendum in favour of getting full power over immigration. They would most certainly win resoundingly in today’s context by tying the issue of accommodating newcomers to the current lack of housing, classrooms and services in the health-care system.
But then what?
After a referendum win, even if Ottawa were to cave and cede Quebec the power to pre-approve all temporary immigrants so Quebec could control the number of arrivals as Legault wants, and to set French language requirements, what would he do? Would he allow the same numbers if they were all French-speaking? If so, how would it magically solve all problems of housing and the other social integration issues? Or would Quebec just drastically reduce the number of immigrants and temporary workers, despite all the implications associated with the labour shortage?
On the other hand, what if Ottawa stood firm and refused to hand over those powers after a referendum? Federal Immigration Minister Marc Miller admonished this week: “Any country that gives away its immigration powers to a third party, a federated state, is no longer a country.” What would Legault then do politically? Would he back off despite the referendum results? Or was he raising the sword — when he mentioned a referendum “more broadly, on other subjects” — of another sovereignty referendum as his ultimate weapon?
This would be seen as an act of desperation, likely destroying any remaining political credibility for Legault, who constantly chides the PQ for its raison d’être.
Miller suggested he and his Quebec counterpart are working collaboratively on finding solutions. Legault did express the hope this week that results could still be achieved as he fended off the PQ, sarcastically accusing the party of wanting talks to fail.
But if Legault instead tries to play chicken with Ottawa to resuscitate his sagging support — on an issue that carries harmful undercurrents linking immigrants to social challenges — he risks deepening an already uncomfortable divide and inflaming debate about Quebec’s international reputation and his assertions about being a welcoming and tolerant society.
Robert Libman is an architect and planning consultant who has served as Equality Party leader and MNA, mayor of Côte-St-Luc and a member of the Montreal executive committee. He was a Conservative candidate in the 2015 federal election. X @robertlibman
