The Liberal candidate in Laurier-Dorion, Deepak Awasti, contests the legitimacy of Quebec to enshrine in the Canadian Constitution that the people of Quebec form a nation and that French is its only official language. The leader of the PLQ assures that she does not marry the opinions of her candidate.
• Read also: François Legault promises to accelerate the deployment of 5G
In a letter to the English-language Montreal newspaper The Suburban, May 26, 2021, Deepak Awasti claims that Justin Trudeau and his government are wrong to maintain that Quebec has the right to modify the Canadian Constitution. He argues that the Trudeau government is wrong with its interpretation of Bill 96.
The federal government is mistaken regarding “the interpretation of the powers allowing the constitutional amendment of Bill 96”, he wrote.
Awasti believes that the Legault government does not have the legitimacy to define Quebec as a “nation” nor that of enshrining in its constitution that French is its “one and only” official and “common” language.
However, in September 2021, the PLQ recognized the right of Quebec to modify the Canadian Constitution to include these two characteristics (nation and French as the one and only official language).
Legal risks
Deepak Awasti maintains that there are legal risks in the application of the articles included by Quebec in the Constitution.
“If the French language is the one and only language of the Quebec state, then why is it still obliged to legislate, operate or serve the public in languages other than the language of the state?” asks the candidate.
He says he sees a contradiction there, because the Constitution also obliges Quebec to allow the use of English in laws, regulations and the justice system.
An interpretation challenged by constitutionalist Patrick Taillon: “Article (133) never says that English is an official language in Quebec.”
More radical than Trudeau
“He is more radical than Justin Trudeau on the issue. The gap with the PLQ is a fortiori greater,” adds the constitutionalist.
The former Liberal minister Benoît Pelletier is also an ardent defender of the modifications made by law 96, indicates Mr. Taillon.
“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Minister of Justice of Canada David Lametti said that Quebec might do that, the PLQ supported these provisions and the PLQ ultimately rejected PL96 for other reasons”, notes Mr. Taillon.
He points out that the leader of the PLQ “said good things recently regarding 90q.1 (nation) she speaks less than 90q.2 (only official language)”.
Anglade disapproves
During a press conference on Monday, Dominique Anglade affirmed that she was “absolutely not” in agreement with her candidate in Laurier-Dorion. “Obviously we voted, even for Bill 96, for this notion (…) We were in favor,” said Ms. Anglade, claiming that Deepak Awasti, who was appointed during an open investiture , today defends the positions of the PLQ on language.
Law 101: a horse-drawn carriage
Moreover, in The Gazette in 2016, Deepak Awasti also wrote that Bill 101 is today an “old horse-drawn carriage in the age of the hybrid car”, he declared, asking for more protection in the law to better protect the English-speaking minority.
Once once more, the Liberal leader admitted that she disagreed with her candidate’s comments. “Absolutely not. Law 101 is clear in relation to the Liberal Party of Quebec,” she said.
She pleads that she had “several” “discussions” with him and that he is now perfectly “in line with” the position of the PLQ.
On our full adherence to Bill 101 and the importance of promoting and protecting French. Hence the 27 measures that we have put forward. I remind you that we are 2% in North America. If we want to continue to evolve in a strong way in Quebec, we need measures to move forward, ”she said.
Open Laws
Nevertheless, the PLQ no longer intends to wait for the renewal of the derogatory clause, included in laws 21 on secularism and 96 on language, to withdraw it.
If she takes power, Mme Anglade intends to open the two laws to quickly modify them.
“In the case of Bill 21, it is the opening to allow teachers to teach. And for 96, we actually said that we would remove the derogation clause to ensure that we have young people who study where they wish and that we remove the question of the six months [pour que les immigrants puissent recevoir des services dans leur langue] as well as other elements that are in there,” she explained.
