President Obama’s Re-Election—for Obvious and Less Obvious Reasons—May Push the Canada-U.S. Relationship to Center-Stage

By Keith Edmund White 

Will Obama’s second term put the Canada-U.S. relationship on center-stage?  A quick round-up of Canadian headlines shows three major issues dominating the post-election Canada-U.S. relationship: (1) in the short-term, Canadian apprehension over America’s ability to reach a debt deal, (2) Keystone XL, and (3) moving forward on the Beyond the Border Initiative.  But let’s not forget two other wrinkles from America’s election night: Heidi Heitkamp’s Senate win and the failure of a state constitutional roadblock to the Detroit River Crossing Project.  And when you add to this Canada’s critical role in the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks, the Canada-U.S. relationship will be getting its fair due during Obama’s second term.

BC’s The Tyee offers a cautious Canadian reaction to President Obama’s re-election.  The article's two chief points: (1) If Obama does not reach a debt deal with Congressional Republicans, who still hold the U.S. House of Representatives, America could tumble into recession, and drag Canada along for the ride; and (2) hope that Obama will clear full construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.  But The Hill calls Keystone XL an energy election-night ‘loser,’ seeing a Romney White House fast-tracking the project.  My guess: with Keystone XL already under construction, I don’t expect the Obama administration to stall Keystone XL’s northern construction much longer.

But, in any case, Heidi Heitkamp’s Senate victory in North Dakota guarantees one strong, Democratic voice in favor of the pipe-line.

And then, of course, one major pit-fall in Canada-U.S. relations was avoided.  Yesterday Michigan voters shot down a state constitutional amendment that would have delayed—and perhaps killed—plans to build a second, bridge crossing connecting Detroit to Windsor over the Detroit River—a project with obvious economic impact in both Canada and the United States, and strongly supported by Canadian Prime Minster Harper.

But one less reported story bears mentioning.  December 2011’s Beyond the Border Initiative (BTB), a Canada-U.S. project to streamline border regulations and bolster border security, might get a jump start.   Birgit Matthiesen offers this BTB post-election update for the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters:

Over the last four years, Canada has too often benignly neglected by our neighbour. But the next four years presents an opportunity to build a North American manufacturing base. The US business community has a partner in Canada. One-third of our cross border business is intra-company and another third is comprised of intra-industry shipments. Our best ideas are each other's next new product.

The ball is in our court, as it always is when dealing with an American administration. But we do not have to start at square one.

Two initiatives between President Obama and Prime Minister Harper have already been launched – the Beyond the Border Action Plan and the Regulatory Cooperation Council. The ambition is great, but the progress is slow. Now that the elections are behind us, Ottawa and Washington need to get back to the table on these two efforts.

We have a major opportunity right now. 2013 must be the year that celebrates our cross-border partnership and the strength that our industries bring to each other's communities. Obsolete border management policies and unnecessary regulations must be replaced by a modern framework that will protect us from the economic storms ahead.

But, the big story—and not once mentioned on cable news last night—is that an Obama victory will continue progress, without the interruption of a presidential transition, on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).  As earlier reported on CUSLI-Nexus, Canada may likely play a critical role in ensuring these talks succeed.  And if this massive trade deal succeeds, it will likely—over the medium and long-term—generate more economic growth--and, at times, painful economic shifting--than any stimulus or jobs bill.  Furthermore, how the TPP goes may well portend how the future effectiveness of the World Trade Organization. 

What’s the importance of listing these seemingly unattached policy items?  First, it seems that two big pressure points in the Canada-U.S. relationship—Keystone XL and the International Detroit River Crossing—have (or soon will be) taken care of.  Next, Canada represents low-hanging economic fruit for the United States.  And—after Obama does heavy lifting on a debt deal and a job bill—the name of the White House economic strategy will be (with one major exception) connecting small dots to generate growth.  One major and needless U.S. economic drain?  Canada-U.S. border regulatory burdens that could be eased through smart, cooperative policies.

Now, naysayers may argue the United States has had trouble keeping focus on Canada.   But, if the TPP talks keep moving ahead, the United States simply won’t have this luxury.  Hence, whether pushed by state-specific issues or international trade diplomacy, the Canada-U.S. relationship may just see its fair share of time on center-stage during Obama's second term.

Canadians Gaga for Obama on Energy; Americans Not So Much

On energy policy, it turns out Canadians and Americans have very different views of the U.S. presidential candidates.  Given the importance of the U.S.-Canada energy relationship, along with the recent candidate kerfuffle at the second presidential debate when it came to energy policy, this difference seems more than just an interesting polling side-note.

• A recent poll finds U.S. voters support President Obama on energy policy over Governor Romney by a 37% - 28% margin.  But that means 35% of U.S. voters are either unsure or undecided.  (Source:  University of Texas on-line poll of ~2,000 individuals)

• But when you look at Canadians, when asked specifically on which presidential candidate would do more to spur Canadian energy imports, 49% favor Obama, 26% favor Romney, and only 26% of Canadians either not knowing or finding no difference between the candidates.  (Source:  Sept. 29, 2012 Forum Research poll of 1,000 Canadian adults) 

Sure, this difference if just polling fluff, Canadians favoring consistency over change, or--perhaps--just the echo of Canada's more left-leaning political scene.  Or, most likely, the lack of coal being a big issue in the Canada-U.S. energy relationship.

PQ’s Learning Curve: Just What the NDP Needs to Win in 2015?

Editorial

By Keith Edmund White

Ignore reports of slipping NDP support, which the Globe and Mail attributes to the Parti Quebecois's (PQ) narrow victory in Quebec last month.  The PQ may be just what the NDP needs to take Ottawa by storm in 2015. 

OK, first some background for those not hip to the Canadian political scene.  In what has been historically a two-party contest for Canada’s national government, the NDP—for the first time—offered a Canadian third way: crushing the once-dominant Liberal Party, but still failing to stop Canada’s conservative party—and Prime Minister Harper—from turning their minority government into a majority government (i.e. the Conservatives had been the biggest party in Parliament, but didn’t have a majority of votes until 2011).  So, now all three parties are plotting how best to approach Canada’s next election, slated to occur on or before October 19, 2015.

Now, all this Ottawa long-game chess-playing gets delightfully complicated by provincial politics.  Just like the first crack in the Obama 2008 coalition was a Republican winning Virginia’s 2009 gubernatorial race, the narrow victory of the Parti Quebecois (PQ)—a pro-Quebec secessionist party—has injected more drama in Canadian politics.  For better or worse, Quebec—owing to history and the ever-present chance another independence referendum—still grabs what some undoubtedly consider a disproportionate share of the nation’s media attention.  So the PQ’s victory has brought headaches—and opportunity—for Canada’s three major national parties.  But, don’t worry, the political pain is being shared, with the PQ already nursing some of their own political missteps.

Why should the PQ running Quebec worry the national Conservatives and NDP?  Well, for the Conservatives, beyond the PQ possibly dragging the country into a constitutional/secessionist crisis (unlikely given their minority government status), the PQ is Quebec’s left-leaning party.  (Note:  The NDP has not built a provincial party in Quebec, even though it owes its ‘government-in-waiting’ status to Quebec voters.)    What’s this mean?  The PQ, according to Paul Wells at Macleans, “is already doing the opposite” of the Harper government on spurring investment, immigration, and energy.  But the big issue here is taxes.  From Wells’s jeremiad-bordering editorial: 

Marois’s new government is already doing the opposite of what Harper laid out at Davos. Systematically. It’s like she’s keeping a checklist.  

“Is it the case that in the developed world,” Harper told the Davos toffs, “too many of us have, in fact, become complacent about our prosperity, taking our wealth as a given, assuming it is somehow the natural order of things, leaving us instead to focus primarily on our services and entitlements?” 

 Marois replies: nope! There’s still plenty of time to take wealth as a given and to focus on entitlements. The university tuition increases that were the object of half a year’s protests are cancelled. But the increased student aid that was supposed to compensate for the tuition hikes remains in place. That’s tens of millions of dollars’ worth of increased burden on universities. “We will continue to make the key investments in science and technology necessary to sustain a modern competitive economy,” Harper said at Davos. Marois is digging a funding hole for universities that will make good science that much harder to afford.

Will this actually cost the Conservative votes?  For now, the overall consensus of the Canadian media elite is that the PQ leftward push is politically foolish and economically wrong-headed.  So, the PQ is doing just what the right-leaning party of Quebec—and the nation—needs to win, right?  Show voters hungry for a change that they should give the reigns to a right leaning, not left leaning party.  Naturally, the Liberals—decimated at the national level, but still strong in Quebec—can play this to their advantage: able to cherry-pick what works for the PQ while bashing what doesn’t, and position themselves as a changed and renewed party that offers the best bet for Quebec voters.

But I suspect the real winners of the PQ in Quebec will be the NDP.  For Conservatives and Liberals to get traction from the PQ, the PQ must fail.  But the NDP can strengthen its next national bid whatever the outcome of the PQ’s minority government.  Yes, the PQ’s victory froze attempts to create a robust, provincial NDP party in Quebec.  But let’s not overlook the obvious advantage the NDP gets in a short-term (the PQ minority government will likely fall well before the next federal election): the chance to learn from every misstep and success of the left-leaning PQ government.

PQ policy subscriptions are—with the exception of succession—pretty close to those of NDP voters.  What’s the NDP missing?  Support of new and current Liberal voters.  How better to see what messages work—and perhaps witness their economic impact—than to have the PQ try push its own independent agenda.  If they succeed, the NDP can make these provincial policies successful national talking points, without the dead-weight of Quebec independence.  And if certain PQ policies crash and burn, the NDP has the time to distance and differentiate their national plans before 2015.  In short, it’s a no-lose for the NPD, barring an NDP debacle of such cataclysmic proportions that Quebec voters become lock-step Harper-ites (unlikely).

So, ignore the polls.  In 2015, the Conservatives will be the classic hangers-on—needing a resurgent economy and new ideas to hold onto Canada’s parliamentary reins for a fourth, yes fourth, time in a row.  The Liberals, well, are in the middle of a leadership contest that could be confused with a nostalgia-heavy spirit quest.  (Yes, I freely double-dip Paul Wells pieces whenever I can; but, do read Gerry Nicholls's compare and contrast piece on Stephen Harper and Liberal upstart/heir-apparent Justin Trudeau.)  And the NDP now has a PQ party too weak to sink their brand in Quebec, but just strong enough to goad Harper, and show the NDP how—or how not—to win in 2015. 

My advice to NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair:  don’t sweat the polls or the PQ.  Focus on using the PQ and Conservatives as foils to create an attractive center-left alternative.  Oh, wait.  He already is.

Foie Gras Dimsum - What China Can Learn from Canada

By David R. Kocan
Canada-U.S. Law Institute Managing Director & CUSLI-Nexus Chairman

Anyone who believes Canadian politics is boring wasn't watching last Wednesday's Quebec elections. After electing Parti Québécois leader Pauline Marois to Premier, she narrowly escaped an anti-separatist's assassin's bullet. Just another chapter in the big book that is the Canada-Quebec relationship. Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, tensions have arisen again in the Hong Kong-Mainland China relationship, as people flooded the streets to protest PRC efforts to introduce patriotism classes in city schools' curricula. Interestingly, Hong Kong also faced an election significant to its autonomy: last Sunday the city for the first time held a public poll to elect over half the Hong Kong legislature. While the pro-China faction won in the overall result, pro-democracy candidates still showed considerable popular support and hold enough seats to veto any changes to Hong Kong's constitution. 

In many ways Quebec and Hong Kong are quite similar. Both were transferred from one government to another. Both have subcultures distinguishable from their national governments'. Each has its own languages, food styles, customs, etc. Both have at times shown strong self-identification while at other times national pride. Moreover, both are economic powerhouses in their own right that benefit their greater societies. Many in China hope that Hong Kong's transition to the PRC will go smoothly and someday serve as a model for integrating other territories.

If Confucius were alive, today perhaps he would say "[s]tudy [Quebec's] past, if you would divine [Hong Kong's] future." In Quebec's case, tensions have ebbed and waned ever since its capitulation to the British following the Seven Year's War. British common law stipulated that the laws and customs of Quebec should remain in tact. But shortly after its transfer, the British King tried to "Anglicize" the newly acquired territory by implementing British common law and preventing Catholics from holding office. This led to a swift negative reaction which forced a British "retreat": the restoration of Quebec's customs and laws. Since then the national government has allowed Quebec to maintain its civil law system. Even so, Quebec's relationship with greater Canada has ebbed and waned as national interests conflict with provincial purvey.

The story of Hong Kong's transition from British to Chinese rule is much shorter but already exhibits similarities to Quebec's story. In 1997, the Chinese officially regained control of Hong Kong in terms with the Sino-British Joint Declaration, which among many things preserved the city's capitalist system and way of life for fifty years. This requirement also covered Hong Kong's British style legal system, which comprised the city's law and governance. By 1997, this legal structure became a part of Hong Kong's identity, inspiring aspirations for democracy.

For sure, the PRC has been much more careful with Hong Kong than Britain was when it obtained Quebec. China has, at least arguably, acted in accordance with the agreement and international law. But adherence to the law is often not enough. For instance, in FG Hemisphere v. DRC it appears the Hong Kong Supreme Court was influenced by a PRC letter that urged an outcome consistent with PRC policy. In FG Hemisphere, the issue was whether a government's assets were protected by sovereign immunity. Hong Kong common law provided no immunity from suit whereas the PRC granted absolute immunity. In its holding the Court justified its deference to the PRC by referencing the Hong Kong Basic Law, which granted the PRC authority over international matters. While there have been reports about the PRC influencing Hong Kong court decisions, this ruling came with little notice. Meanwhile, when the mainland attempts to influence Hong Kong's social issues, for instance, by mandating schools to teach to teach Chinese patriotism, the reaction is stronger. These interventions while legal, are often met by larger public dismay.
 
While Sunday's election has ended, the details of Hong Kong's planned transition to full democratic rule in 2017 still need to be hammered out.  So, in the meantime, Hong Kong and China may find value in looking to the lessons of Canada?

Week's End News Round-Up

Canada's Dutch Disease:  Fact or Fiction?  Today Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney defends Canada's growing economic reliance on energy, increasing commodity prices be damned.  If you want to see his take on the energy sector vs. manufacturing sector debate, check out Maclean's Stephen Gordon's "annotation" to Gordon's speech--you'll feel like your an economist for a day!  And you'll see evidence that Canada and America's trading relationship may be changing in the coming decade:

So what treatment does [Carney] suggest? A good summary of his recommendations is “eat your vegetables.” Firstly, Canadians should get past the notion that the path to prosperity lies in being the low-cost exporter of manufactured goods to the United States... 

Carney's answer:  Dutch disease worries are a "caricature" which would limit the positive growth of Alberta's oil sands.  Naturally, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) disagrees.

Reforming Canada's Healthcare.  The Hill Times' opinion page offers a strong argument to allow a mixed-healthcare system in Canada (i.e. allow Canadians to pay for private care).  Some interesting parts from the piece: 

If all of this bureaucratese sounds familiar, you’re right. This is the 19th major examination of the Canadian health-care system in the past 15 years. Yet, once again, the “nail” each study has continued to hammer is stuck in the paradigm that Canada’s health-care system must remain a government run monopoly.

That paradigm was starkly enunciated by Health Council of Canada member and former Vancouver General Hospital president Charles Wright who stated: “Administrators maintain waiting lists the way airlines overbook. As for urgent cases, the public system will decide when their pain requires care. The individual cannot decide rationally.”

...

If so, they should take heed of a recent Ipsos Reid survey that shows 76 per cent of Canadians support a “mixed model” of health care giving them the option of spending their own money for private care.

Job Growth Pushes The Canadian Dollar Up Against the Dollar.  Canada added 30K+ jobs last month, pushing up the Canadian dollar.  But Canada's 7.3% unemployment rate hasn't changed; though, British Columbia's unemployment has gone down.  America's job-outlook:  not so great.  

The Mega-Rich America's New Successionists?  Mike Lofgren, a longtime U.S. Congressional budget committee Republican staffer, writes in The American Conservative:

If a morally acceptable American conservatism is ever to extricate itself from a pseudo-scientific inverted Marxist economic theory, it must grasp that order, tradition, and and stability are not coterminous with an uncritical worship of the Almightly Dollar, nor with obesisance to the demands of the wealthy.  Conservatives need to think about the world they want:  do they really desire a social Darwinist dystopia?

...

Now, almost two decades later, the super-rich have achieved escape velocity from the gravitational pull of the very society they rule over. They have seceded from America.

Agree or not, Lofgren's new book, The Party Is Over:  How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted is worth checking out, as is the rest of his article Revolt of the Rich.

Canada Gets Out of Iran.   Canada today severed diplomatic ties with Iran, closing up their embassy and giving Iranian diplomats 5 days to get out.

Ontario Gets a Minority Liberal Government (Again).  After two by-elections in Ontario, the Conservatives lost a seat they held for 22 years, and the NDP won a seat the Liberals held since 2001.  The result?  The Liberals fell one-seat short (again) of a majority government.  As for the Conservatives' shutout, Progressive Conservative Ontario leader Tim Hudak is keeping his job.  Interesting note:  the byelection was engineered by the Liberals to win a majority.

PQ Leader/Quebec's New PM Pauline Marois: "...I wouldn't trust her to run a lemonade stand."

By Keith Edmund White

Has the PQ's much smaller-than-expected victory Tuesday ushered in the year of the PQ-CAQ?  

Thank you Yahoo!News Canada for this fantastic take on the just how long the PQ will hang onto their minority government:

Gerry Nicholls: Well, when it comes to Marois' management skills, I wouldn't trust her to run a lemonade stand. Next election will be in the Fall of 2013.

Bruce Hicks: If Marois governs judiciously, she could govern for two years before she might herself decide to go to the polls and try to get a majority. If she tries to do many things without trying to get the support of MNAs outside her party she will probably be brought down by the opposition in 12-18 months.

Gerry Nicholls and Bruce Hicks are both political scientists, and part of Yahoo!News Canada's expert panel on politics.  Conservative commentator Nicholls, self-professed as one of Canada's Top Five Political Minds, hails from Southern Ontario, and offers this fantastically written blog.

Bruce Hicks, who is now a Visiting Scholar at Carlton University, offers the more measured take on the PQ's chances.  Hicks boasts a career in political strategy, journalism, and--most relevant to boviations on Quebec politics--he was an Associate at Montreal University's Canada Research Chair in Electoral Studies (CRCES).  You can find more of his work here.

Beyond the doubts in Marois' management skills, perhaps supported by the PQ coming dangerously close to blowing a sizable lead in the polls last week, Hicks brings up a crucial point:  how is the PQ going to govern, since it will need votes from either the Liberals or right-leaning CAQ?  Well, time will tell, but the CAQ--a conservative coalition party that puts right-leaning reforms ahead of independence issues--seems ready to work with the PQ.

While the PQ and Liberals are ideologically more in sync, the ever-so slim defeat for the Liberals coupled with the CAQ's likely desire to build off their somewhat disappointing third place finish, may lead to a tepid PQ-CAQ partnership.

Note:  It would be remiss to omit a reference to the tragic shooting at the PQ's post-election celebration on Tuesday, which resulted in one death, one critical injury, and a third person's treatment for shock.

Quebec Election 2012: The Significance of a CAQ Win

by Keith Edmund White

Yes, the PQ is still leading polls.  But after a reader comment directed me to review the parties' economic platforms, two things became very clear:  (1) the conservative CAQ are definitely in contention and (2) a CAQ government in Quebec would mean big changes to the economic and spending policies coming out of Quebec City.

Quebec Party Platforms

After a reader comment on an earlier post regarding the PQ’s economic platform, I thought readers might appreciate having a few resources on policy positions of Quebec’s three leading political parties: the PQ, the Liberals, and the CAQ.

One can find these parties full platforms at CBC News. (Side-note: to get the PQ’s platform in English, check out this Google-Translate page).

And for those wanting a quick primer, Reuters offers this crib sheet of these parties’ respective economic platforms.

Political Recap: PQ Leads, but CAQ Is on the Rise

The Gazette, a leading Montreal newspaper, offers an excellent report on the dynamics of the 2012 Quebec election. The PQ leads (with around 33%), but is unpopular, and is now shifting its attacks from its Liberal opponents (who have slipped to third place) to the CAQ. Both the Liberals and PQ are polling in the high 20s, but the Liberals are slipping, while the CAQ is on the assent.

The possibility of the CAQ winning a three-way race against the PQ and Liberals is itself a historic and significant development in Quebec politics. As the discussion below of the parties respective platforms will reveal, the CAQ has the opportunity to push a drastically more conservative approach to government spending and taxing in a province where a majority of the voters favor left or center-left on economic policies. Oh, the joys of modified parliamentary systems!

The Economic Politics of Quebec: Left (PQ) vs. the Center-Left (Libs) vs. the Conservative (CAQ) 

Now while I can’t comment on previous governing records in Quebec, the Reuters report allows a few conclusions to be drawn of these parties economic plans. 

1. Balancing the Budget:  All three parties are committed to balancing the province’s budget by 2013-14. 
2. Spending:  The PQ and Liberals favor government spending, but the Liberals’ spending plans are half of those of the PQ. 
3. Taxes:  All three parties are pushing tax increases, but the CAQ’s revenue plans only increase the estate taxes of second homes.  But guess what?  This revenue goes to paying for an income tax cut.

Conclusion

PQ is pushing (by to use American standards) and pretty liberal economic plan, Liberals are pushing what could be viewed as a center-left plan, with the CAQ’s plan that would probably find a lot in common with the Republican economic platform.

And on a final note, I find myself a touch envious that when Quebec voters go to the polls next week, they'll actually know--to a surprising degree of detail--what policies they're voting for.  The U.S. 2012 election, for all the focus on the role of government in the economy, has yet to see either major party lay out any real details on government spending. 

Quebec Election 2012: The (Inward Looking?) PQ Is Back, Liberals Fall, and the Center-Right CAQ Shows Its Staying Power

By Keith Edmund White

For American political junkies bored by the Democratic and Republican conventions, I would recommend tracking Quebec’s provincial election, taking place Sept. 4. Not only is the three-way race close, a center-right party is in striking distance of taking power in Quebec for the first time in modern history.

Admittedly, after four nights of debate, a poll has the Parti Quebecois (PQ)—a party supporting Quebec sovereignty and separation from Canada) in the lead, with 33% of the vote. And this might be the lead story, since 2007 saw support for the PQ implode, and give the party its first third-place finish in decades.

But most dramatic, to me, is the tie between the Liberal Party and the Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ)—a new party combining the former conservative Action Democratic Party and parts of the Parti Quebecois, standing at 27% and 28% respectively. Also, of note: the same poll found CAQ leader Francois Legault out-performed his rivals, the PQ’s Jean Pauline Marois and the Liberal’s Jean Charest.

Quebec has been governed by the Liberal Party for the last nine years, and either the Liberals or the PQ have held Quebec's parliament for the last forty years. (Side-note: anyone with a chance to visit Quebec City should really take a tour of the gorgeous parliament building and note the distinct lack of Canadian flags until you enter the near-by Parks Canada Fortifications of Quebec, a national historic site).

Most immediately, the PQ’s rise now has Quebec sovereignty issues grabbing headlines. First, the PQ has found itself twisting over its position on the timing of yet-another referendum on Quebec independence. The issue: whether only a petition of 15% of Quebec’s citizens would trigger a third referendum on independence, or if provincial parliamentary approval would be needed before a referendum took place. The significance: With only 30-40% of Quebec's citizens supporting independence, many voters see focusing on cultural or independence issues—instead of say, focusing on economic issues—not a thrilling prospect.

Second, the PQ is also facing criticism for some pro-sovereignty planks in its platforms. The PQ now wants a French language test for anyone running in provincial or municipal elections and a secularism charter that bans public servants from wearing of “conspicuous” religious symbols.

The National Post probes this inward lurch the PQ, interviewing critics and opponents of the PQ’s platform, gets at two conclusions: (1) demographic changes do show that Montreal may become minority French-speaking within two decades, a troubling development to Quebecers in favor of preserving the city’s French culture; (2) while easily characterized as intolerant, the moves do support PQ’s central goal of independence: (a) both proposals will likely be slapped down the Canadian Supreme Court, making it easy for the PQ to show Quebec doesn’t ‘fit’ into Canada’s federalism and (b) they are measures, if enacted, which could lead to next decade’s young voters pushing a independence reference over 50%.

But more interesting, to me, is the raise of the center-right CAQ. First, it is important to note, that in the 2007 provincial elections, its pre-merger Action Democratic Party finished second, taking advantage of an imploding PQ. But now, even in the face of a reinvigorated PQ party, the newly-minted CAQ is showing that center-rights politics in Quebec aren’t fading fast.

Sympathetic to Quebec’s French identity, the CAQ supports Quebec nationalism, but has promised a moratorium on independence for 10 years. In doing so, it has transformed the election from one between a left-leaning federalist party and left-leaning separatist party, but one that promises either a durable center-right opposition party, or even a possible center-right government in Quebec. In fact, the only thing that seems to be holding the CAQ from getting even more supports are doubts that the CAQ, like the PQ, will push for Quebec’s independence from Canada.

In short, this election matters. Will the PQ hang onto their lead, but then find its return to political power short-lived: with squabbling over a third referendum and court battles robbing it of public support? Will the Liberals hang on, stoking fears that a PQ and CAQ win will focus Quebec politics on independence and culture issues, at the expense of more pressing issues, like the economy and healthcare? Or will the CAQ quash doubts about its commitment to Canadian federalism, and break the left-leaning strangle hold on Quebec politics?