Québec 2014: CAQ Vote Efficiency Up From 2012

The complete preliminary results are in:

LIB - 70 (41.5%)

PQ - 30 (25.4%)

CAQ - 22 (23.1%)

QS - 3 (7.6%)

With a uniform swing from last election, the seat distribution would have been LIB 76, PQ 35, CAQ 12, QS 2. Thus, from a projection modeling standpoint, the big news of this election is that the CAQ vote got much more efficient, allowing it to win 10 extra seats.

Consider the following:

- The CAQ gained 8 of the 9 ridings where it lost by less than 8% to the PQ in 2012 and that the Liberals did not win this time. The only exception was Rousseau, where outgoing Finance Minister Marceau held on. The only other CAQ gain was Masson, next door to Legault's riding. Therefore, it's as if the CAQ gained 8% on the PQ, even though the actual swing was only 2.6% (from a 4.9% gap to a 2.3% gap).

- The 5 CAQ losses to the Liberals were exactly the 5 ridings that it won by less than 8% over the Liberals in 2012. (The only other CAQ loss was Saint-Jérôme, where star CAQ incumbent Jacques Duchesnau, who did not run, was replaced by PQ star Pierre-Karl Péladeau.) Therefore, it's as it the CAQ fell by 8% relative to the Liberals, even though the actual swing was 14.3% (from a 4.1% gap to a 18.4% gap).

Taken together, the increased efficiency of the CAQ vote was worth a whopping 6% to the party! That is, if swing were uniform, the CAQ would have had to get about 4% more, equally from the Liberals and the PQ, to achieve its seat count of 22.

The increased efficiency of the CAQ vote is evidence that people do vote strategically when they can. It was hard to do in 2012 because both the CAQ and the electoral map were new. This time, however, potential CAQ voters had some guidance as to whether it was worth voting for Legault's party. This might have made the CAQ lose votes where it is uncompetitive, and gain votes where it is the main alternative to the PQ.

Of course, one could also attribute the increased CAQ vote efficiency to the CAQ leading a more focused campaign based on data from 2012. However, the PQ also had a very focused campaign, which did not prevent them from doing poorly where it focused.

How about the Liberal/PQ vote efficiency? It basically did not change compared to 2012. The PQ to Liberal swing was 16.9%, and there were 16 ridings that the PQ won by less than 16.9% over the Liberals in 2012 and that the CAQ did not carry this time. Of those, the Liberals won 14, the only exceptions being Bonaventure and Taschereau, which were both close. The only other Liberal gain from the PQ was Roberval, the riding of Premier-elect Couillard. Thus, the basic uniform swing model would have, as is often the case, done a fantastic job predicting seat changes between the two main parties.

Québec 2014: Last Polls, Four Scenarios, Prediction (just for fun), and Around the Web

Five firms have released polls conducted in the last week of the campaign (UPDATE: Changed the 3/31 Forum poll to the 4/3 Forum poll, released on 4/6):

Ipsos: 3/28-4/1, sample size 1012
EKOS: 3/27-4/3, sample size 1422
Léger: 4/2-3, sample size 1220
Forum: 4/3, sample size 1536
Angus Reid: 4/2-4, sample size 1410

Their numbers:

Ipsos:   LIB 37,    PQ 28,    CAQ 19,    QS 13 (committed: 40-28-18-12)
EKOS: LIB 40.0, PQ 26.3, CAQ 21.0, QS 9.6 (likely: 39.8-27.0-21.1-9.4)
Léger:  LIB 38.1, PQ 29.0, CAQ 23.4, QS 8.0
Forum: LIB 44,    PQ 24,    CAQ 23,    QS 6
Angus: LIB 39,    PQ 27,    CAQ 25,    QS 7 (likely voters only)

The big question is: will there be a "ballot box bonus," as there was in the three previous elections? If so, who gets it? In 2007, the ADQ (predecessor of the CAQ), third according to polls, finished second and almost formed the government. In 2008, the PQ unexpectedly won over 50 seats and almost prevented the Liberals from winning a majority. In 2012, the Liberals were four seats short of retaining power and ensured that the PQ was well short of the majority threshold, even though the last polls appeared to suggest a slim PQ majority.

I should note that in both 2007 and 2008, the "bonuses" noted above were relative to the last CROP and Léger polls, while Angus Reid actually turned out quite accurate. In 2012, Angus Reid did not publish a pre-election poll, while all four firms in the field underestimated Liberal support.

So, let's look at what each of these scenarios would imply. In all cases, I'm assuming 7% support for QS, whose result was at the lower end of the last polls in the last 3 elections. I did not build a seat projection model, so I will use the one provided by Too Close to Call, which was the best model in 2012.

1. Angus Reid is right again: LIB 39, PQ 27, CAQ 25
LIB - 70
PQ - 40
CAQ - 13
QS - 2
The CAQ saves most, but not all, of its seats. The Liberals win a moderate majority, while the PQ has its second worst showing in the last 7 elections.

2. Liberal ballot box bonus (2012 scenario, exemplified by Forum poll): LIB 44, PQ 24, CAQ 23
LIB - 87
PQ - 27
CAQ - 9
QS - 2
Best Liberal since 1989 and worst PQ result since 1985 - would be a terrible shock for the PQ.

3. PQ rebound (2008 scenario): LIB 36, PQ 32, CAQ 23
LIB - 57
PQ - 57
CAQ - 9
QS - 2
We'd be up very very late (even on the West Coast)! The efficiency of the PQ vote allows it to challenge for government status, even while the Liberals clearly win the popular vote.

4. CAQ momentum continues (2007 scenario): LIB 36, CAQ 29, PQ 26
LIB - 62
PQ - 33
CAQ - 28
QS - 2
Another scenario where we'd be up late, both to see if the Liberals win a majority, and to see who forms the official opposition. What would it mean for the PQ if it ends up as the third party for four years?

So there's an outside chance of a PQ minority, and an outside chance of a CAQ official opposition with a Liberal government. However, it is by far most likely that the Liberals will form Québec's next government, while the PQ as the official opposition. A majority appears more likely than a minority, but the latter would not be surprising.

Just for fun, here's my totally unsystematic prediction (not projection):
LIB - 67
PQ - 36 (same as 2007)
CAQ - 19 (same as 2012)
QS - 3

Here are some projections from the usual suspects around the web (UPDATE: Too Close to Call's projection is now available. UPDATE 2: Blunt Objects (Kyle) projection added, and ThreeHundredEight projection updated.):
Blunt Objects (Teddy): LIB 72 (38.2%), PQ 35 (28.0%), CAQ 14 (23.0%), QS 4 (9.2%)
Blunt Objects (Kyle): LIB 69.5 (39.8%), PQ 47.5 (29.4%), CAQ 6 (21.0%), QS 2 (7.7%)
ThreeHundredEight:     LIB 69 (40.1%), PQ 45 (26.9%), CAQ 9 (22.8%), QS 2 (7.9%)
Too Close to Call:        LIB 72 (40.2%), PQ 40 (27.4%), CAQ 11 (23.3%), QS 2 (7.4%)

Happy election watching!

Happy New Year!

Happy 2013!

Ironic tidbit: the PQ fulfilled its promise to raise taxes on rich Quebecers only partially so that the top tax rate would remain below 50%. However, with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts on high income Americans and the increased Medicare tax, individuals with federal taxable income above $400,000 and married couples with federal taxable income above $450,000 will be paying a marginal rate above 50% in California, New York City, Oregon and Hawaii. Those four jurisdictions have more than 50 million residents! It looks like Québec wouldn't have been so out of whack after all...

Recap of Québec 2012 Results

Obviously, the Liberals did much better than expected, with a "ballot box bonus" of 4-5%. Some commentators have said that this usually happens in Québec elections. While this may have been true historically, it wasn't in 2007, when the ADQ got the bounce, and in 2008, when the PQ got the bounce. So I don't think that this bounce could have been predicted based on past experience alone. Rather, it is more likely that many Quebecers intending to vote Liberals felt somewhat ashamed, and didn't want to admit it to pollsters: they felt that they had to vote for a party perceived as corrupt because the other options were so unappetizing.

The Liberals' bounce was across the board and allowed them to beat expectations by winning most tight races rather than by coming "out of the blue" in many seats. To see this, here's a region-by-region breakdown of the results:

Far Away Regions: 16 PQ, 1 LIB
  3 PQ in Abitibi-Témiscamingue
  1 PQ in Northern Québec
  2 PQ in Côte-Nord
  5 PQ in Saguenay--Lac-St-Jean
  3 PQ in Gaspésie--Îles-de-la-Madeleine
  2 PQ, 1 LIB in Bas-St-Laurent
I had predicted that the PQ would come close to sweeping this region, which is what happened.

Capitale-Nationale: 6 CAQ, 3 LIB, 2 PQ
Chaudière-Appalaches: 4 LIB, 3 CAQ
  7 CAQ, 3 LIB, 1 PQ in Quebec City Census Metropolitan Area
The Liberals did better than expected here, at the expense of the CAQ. I had thought that the CAQ would win at least 12 seats in this area, but it only got 9.


Mauricie: 3 LIB, 2 PQ
Central Québec: 3 CAQ
Estrie: 3 LIB, 2 PQ
Outaouais: 5 LIB
No big surprises in these regions: the Mauricie and the Estrie were predicted to be tight, Central Québec was predicted to go for the CAQ, and the Liberals were expected to win a majority of the Outaouais seats, with a good chance of a sweep. Still, the Liberals came in at the higher end of the expected range, as it beat the PQ in the Mauricie and the Estrie, and swept the Outaouais.

Laurentides-Lanaudière: 11 PQ, 4 CAQ
Laval: 4 LIB, 2 PQ
Montérégie: 13 PQ, 7 LIB, 3 CAQ
Montréal: 20 LIB, 6 PQ, 2 QS
  29 LIB, 20 PQ, 6 CAQ, 2 QS in Montréal Census Metropolitan Area
Again, no big surprises, but the Liberals performed at the higher end of expectations everywhere (except Laurentides-Lanaudière, where their only shot was Argenteuil): they kept all their Montréal seats, retained a majority in hard-fought Laval, and saved as many Montérégie seats at they could. The CAQ, on the other hand, performed at the low end of expectations, losing most races to the PQ.

The Liberals won almost every seat where they were in contention, particularly in races against the PQ. Indeed, the Liberals lost only one race to the PQ by less than 3.5% (Saint-François), but won in six ridings with less than 3.5% over the PQ (Richmond, Verdun, Trois-Rivières, Papineau, Maskinongé, Jean-Lesage).

This also means that even though the Liberals had to flip only two PQ seats to hang on to government, they weren't actually that close. Indeed, if the Liberals had gotten 2% extra in every riding, 1.5% from the CAQ and 0.5% from the PQ, they would still have lost the election 53-54 despite winning the popular vote by almost 2%. (In this scenario, the Liberals would have taken Saint-François from the PQ, as well as Vanier and Charlesbourg from the CAQ, but the PQ would have taken La Prairie from the CAQ.)

The four projection models available online all had similar calls, and no single prediction was obviously better than the others. Fortunately, three of these websites published what their projections would have been given the right popular vote. This allows us to assess which vote-to-seat model was most accurate:

Too Close To Call: PQ 51, LIB 48, CAQ 24, QS 2
ThreeHundredEight: PQ 53, LIB 42, CAQ 28, QS 2
RidingByRiding: PQ 48, LIB 44, CAQ 31, QS 2

The clear winner is Too Close To Call, while 308 fares a little better than RxR. All three models overestimate the CAQ. This is probably because they use the ADQ as the CAQ's baseline, but in reality, the CAQ's support isn't as efficiently distributed as the ADQ's was.

We can also wonder about the value added of these models. Anyone could have applied a simple uniform swing to the 2007 or 2008 results: for each party, adding/subtracting the same percentage in every riding, and not take into account the boundary changes. Doing so would have given:

Based on 2007: PQ 52, LIB 43, CAQ 30
Based on 2008: PQ 58, LIB 47, CAQ 19, QS 1

A crude way to transform these into a single sensible projection would be to average them, and bring QS up to 2 seats to the detriment of the PQ. This would have given: PQ 53.5, LIB 45, CAQ 24.5, QS 2.

TCTC fares a little better, so it provides some real value added. On the other hand, unfortunately, 308 and RxR fare worse, so at least for this election, those models weren't very useful, although those websites remain excellent resources for maps (RxR), graphics (308) and analysis (both).

Election Night

8:30pm: Liberals surprisingly strong for now, and in the lead! Very early though, and probably mainly early votes being counted.

8:59pm: PQ government declared by Radio-Canada. Not sure if it'll be a minority or majority. It could be a long night, as many thought. The surprise is that the Liberals are, for now, above 30%. They are holding up particularly well in Quebec City, which hurts the CAQ, which sits at 18 seats despite actually getting the expected vote count (27-28%). The Liberals are also holding up in the Eastern Townships (except in Charest's Sherbrooke seat!), which is what separates the PQ from a majority.

9:15pm: Things have stabilized. The PQ is a few seats from a majority, but very close if you add in the two QS seats. The Eastern Townships are really what makes the difference right now.

9:43pm: Numbers have moved very little. It now looks quite unlikely that the PQ will win an outright majority. However, PQ+QS could get 63 seats, though they're quite not there now.

10:01pm: Radio-Canada declares that the next PQ government will be a minority. This is, of course, not a surprise, since everyone acknowledged it as a likely (even though not necessarily the most likely) outcome. The surprise, however, is that it's the Liberals, rather than the CAQ, that stood in the way of the PQ: right now, the PQ only leads the popular vote by 2%.

12:30am: It looks like the final results are:

54 PQ (32%)
50 LIB (31%)
19 CAQ (27%)
  2 QS (6%)

Note that the Liberals are exactly at the very high end of my admittedly wide ranges, both for the seat count and for the popular vote. They won more seats than when they formed government in 2007!

As for the act of terrorism, well, Québec politics are not dull. It will be interesting to see the fallout... Update: Apparently, it was even more serious than first thought. Let's hope that every Quebecer and every Canadian, from hard-core separatist organizations to compulsive Québec bashers, react to this in a responsible way.

Québec 2012: My Two Cents

Although I haven't built a formal projection model for Québec, I couldn't resist playing around with the numbers. First, we run into the problem of projecting the popular vote. This is even trickier than usual, as I will argue below. Four firms have released polls in the last few days:

CROP: 8/27-29, sample size 1002
Léger: 8/29-31, sample size 1856
EKOS: 8/31-9/3, sample size 1749
Forum: 9/3, sample size 2781

Their numbers:
CROP: PQ 32,    CAQ 28,    LIB 26,    QS 9
Léger:   PQ 33,    CAQ 28,    LIB 27,    QS 7
EKOS: PQ 36.0, CAQ 24.5, LIB 23.2, QS 10.7
Forum:  PQ 36,    CAQ 25,    LIB 29,    QS 6

What to make of this? First, here are some things to keep in mind:

1. Forum also polled 8/27-28, and had numbers very close to those of Léger and CROP. So there may indeed have been movement from the CAQ and QS to the PQ.

2. Polling during Labour Day weekend can be good because it's closer to Election Day. It can also be bad because the sample may be different. This puts the movement posited in point 1 in doubt.

3. Forum also had a weird poll after the first debate showing the Liberals at 35%, completely out of whack with everything else we've seen.

4. In the 2008 election, the Québec firms (CROP and Léger) had the PQ at 29% and 32%. Then Angus Reid, who had been quiet all campaign, swooped in showing the PQ at 36%. The PQ finished with 35.15%. Moreover, in the 2007 election, the Québec firms had the ADQ at 25% and 26%. Then Angus Reid, who had been quiet all campaign, swooped in showing the ADQ at 30%. The ADQ finished with 30.84%.

5. The ADQ, the CAQ's predecessor, beat the average of the last CROP, Léger and Angus Reid by 3.8% in 2007 and 2% in 2008.

6. EKOS usually overestimates the Greens federally. The same may happen with QS.

7. I am not aware of any track record for EKOS and Forum in Québec provincial elections. Will they play the role of Angus Reid? Or will they miss badly, being newcomers to the Québec provincial scene?

As you can see, it's quite a bit harder to interpret these polls than in a "standard" election, since no pollster with a track record was in the field in the last 3 days of the campaign, which was a summer long weekend. My best guess would be:
PQ 34.5% (30.5-38)
CAQ 28% (23-32)
LIB 27% (23-31)
QS 6.5% (5-10)

My call for the seat count is:
PQ 68 (35-82)
CAQ 25 (16-50)
LIB 30 (22-50)
QS 2 (1-4)

You'll note that my ranges are usually just a little wider than 308's, except on the low end for the PQ and the high end for the CAQ. This is to account for the possibility that the CAQ gets a repeat of the 2007 ADQ ballot box bonus - not the most likely scenario, but also not a remote one. However, even though all the ranges overlap, the following scenarios are extremely unlikely:

- the PQ finishing third, since the CAQ and the Liberals likely won't both be high, as they share the pool of federalist voters;
- a Liberal win, since the PQ and the CAQ likely won't both be low, as they fight each other in many ridings.

These could only happen in a "perfect storm" of sorts, where all three parties end up with 30-31%. Interestingly, the Liberals' only faint hope at finishing first involves the CAQ doing well, since this would hurt the PQ much more than the Liberals. However, since the beginning of the campaign, the CAQ and the Liberals have not combined for over 60% in any poll (if I remember correctly), so this is very unlikely.

In fact, the scenarios that I find plausible as to the ranking of parties and majority/minority remain the same as last week. However, the latest two polls showing the PQ at 36% have reduced the chance of a CAQ win, and increased the chance of a PQ majority. I'd say that there's a ~60% chance of a PQ majority, a 30-35% chance of a PQ minority, and a 5-10% chance of a CAQ minority.

Whatever happens, it'll be a fascinating election night tomorrow. Have fun!

Projections Around the Web

Since this post was first published, two new pollsters have new numbers. First, EKOS, which hasn't given numbers all campaign long, comes out with:
PQ 36.0%, CAQ 24.5%, LIB 23.2%, QS 10.7% (sample size 1,749, 8/31-9/3)

Then, Forum gives us:
PQ 36%, LIB 29%, CAQ 25%, QS 6% (sample size 2,781, 9/3)

Furthermore, a fourth projection website, RidingByRiding, was brought to my attention.

This has resulted in the following updates:
1. I moved my own analysis to another post.
2. I added numbers from RidingByRiding, which take all four most recent polls (Forum, EKOS, Léger and CROP) into account.
3. The numbers from Too Close To Call have been updated to take the Forum (but not EKOS) numbers into account.
4. The other two websites have not yet updated for either the latest Forum or the latest EKOS.

Here are the calls of the four projection websites:
Too Close To Call: PQ 66 (33.1%), LIB 33 (27.1%), CAQ 24 (27.4%), QS 2 (7.6%)
ThreeHundredEight: PQ 63 (34.1%), LIB 33 (27.9%), CAQ 27 (26.3%), QS 2 (7.5%)
ElectionsQC: PQ 69 (32.7%), LIB 30 (26.8%), CAQ 23 (27.8%), QS 2 (7.8%), ON 1
RidingbyRiding: PQ 70 (35.0%), LIB 30 (27.8%), CAQ 22 (26.65%), QS 2 (6.5%), ON 1

All four websites call for a thin PQ majority. We note that 308 has different popular vote estimates because it adds an adjustment favouring the PQ and the Liberals at the expense of the CAQ. We also see that the TCTC model to transform popular vote into seats is kinder to the PQ than the 308 model (more seats with lower popular vote), but not as kind as the ElectionsQC model (fewer seats with higher popular vote). RidingByRiding gets results close to ElectionsQC, but probably uses a higher popular vote for the PQ because it includes the Forum poll.

Although I'm out of the projections game this time around, I've still played around the the numbers a little. I believe that the ElectionsQC model is too optimistic for the PQ: if the PQ gets 69 seats, which is certainly possible especially given the latest polls, it would likely need more than 32.7%.

I also disagree with the 308 popular vote adjustment (although if 308 doesn't update for the latest Forum poll, which goes in the same direction, then the adjustment effectively averages that poll in). It could end up being right, but I would not use it as a "best guess", especially since the CAQ's predecessor (ADQ) outperformed the last CROP and Léger polls by 5-6% in 2007, an election with somewhat similar dynamics.

Therefore, of these models, I personally prefer the TCTC and the RxR ones. The difference between their projections can be attributed to the inclusion of the EKOS numbers by RxR, but not by TCTC. However, there is so much uncertainty this time around that I would urge you to be even more cautious than usual when interpreting these models.

Quebec 2012: Much Uncertainty

The two major pollsters in Québec have published their last poll:
CROP - PQ 32%, CAQ 28%, Lib 26%
Léger - PQ 33%, CAQ 28%, Lib 27%

Also, Forum Research's most recent poll (I don't know if it was their last one) had PQ 33%, Lib 28%, CAQ 27%.

Obviously, the three pollsters are in agreement about the overall numbers. But there is much uncertainty about what seat distribution would arise. The best guess, should the PQ win by about 5%, with the two other parties roughly tied, is that the PQ will be very close to the majority cutoff (63 seats), one way or the other, while the Liberals would form the Official Opposition.

However, given that the CAQ is a new party and that the election is being fought on a new electoral map, the projections this time around are less reliable than usual. For example, with actual vote shares, the 2011 federal election would have been pretty easy to get right outside of Québec. But this time, even if we could see the overall vote shares in advance, the predicted seat counts would be subject to significant uncertainty. Add to that notoriously fickle Québec voters - the last CROP and Léger in 2007 had the ADQ at 25-26%, when it actually got 30.8% - and the truth is that we can't even be sure that the PQ is going to win.

What we do know is that certain regions are much more unpredictable than others: about 2/3 of the seats in the "450" (Laval, Laurentians, Lanaudière and Montérégie) seats are closely contested, while only 1/4 of the races in Montreal, Quebec City area, Central Quebec and far away regions are tight. Here's a quick overview of the electoral geography for this election.

"Far away" regions (17 seats, Abitibi--Témiscamingue, North, Côte-Nord, Saguenay--Lac-St-Jean, Gaspésie--Îles-de-la-Madeleine, Bas-St-Laurent)
The PQ should win at least 13 of the 17 seats, and could sweep all 17.

Greater Quebec City and nearby areas (21 seats, National Capital Region, Chaudière--Appalaches, Central Québec)
The CAQ should win at least 14 of the 21 seats, and the PQ should win two (Pauline Marois in Charlevoix and downtown Quebec City). It'll be interesting to see if Option Nationale leader Jean-Martin Aussant can be elected in Nicolet-Bécancour. The remaining are essentially Liberal-CAQ races, and it would not be surprising for the Liberals to be wiped out even though they won a majority of this region's seats in 2008.

Estrie (5 seats)
The Liberals won all 5 seats in 2008 (though the previous version of Johnson, won by the PQ, included part of the region), but none of them, including Jean Charest's Sherbrooke seat, is assured this time. It's an all out fight between the Liberals and the PQ in every seat.

Mauricie (5 seats)
Hard to tell what'll happen here, as all three parties have a shot at winning seats.

Outaouais (5 seats)
The Liberals have swept this region in every election since 1981, but this time, the PQ could win in Hull and especially Papineau.

Laurentians and Lanaudière (15 seats)
The Liberals' only shot is in Argenteuil, which they won in 2008, but lost by 3% in a June by-election. Otherwise, this area could well determine whether the PQ wins a majority or a minority: there are a handful of safe PQ seats, but most of the other ridings feature tight PQ-CAQ races. CAQ leader François Legault, as well as star candidates Jacques Duchesnau and Gaétan Barrette, are all running here, and none is assured of winning.

Laval (6 seats)
The Liberals swept Laval in 2008, but this time, they are only assured of retaining Chomedey. All five other seats will be tight, though student leader Léo Bureau-Blouin has a good chance of winning Laval-des-Rapides for the PQ. The CAQ could be a factor, but the main contenders are the Liberals and the PQ.

Montérégie (23 seats)
Apart from their two strongholds of Vaudreuil and La Pinière (Brossard), the Liberals have no safe seats, and are only competitive in a handful of other ridings near the western half of the Island of Montreal. The PQ has several safe ridings near the eastern half of the Island of Montreal. The rest of the region (about half of the 23 seats) will feature right PQ-CAQ races, much like in Laurentides-Lanaudière.

Montréal (28 seats)
There are 6 tight races in Montreal: not much, but more than usual. Anjou, Laurier-Dorion, Verdun and Saint-Henri--Sainte-Anne will be tight between the Liberals and the PQ, while Gouin (Françoise David's riding) and Sainte-Marie--Saint-Jacques are fought between the PQ and QS. The remaining 22 ridings will likely divide as follows: 16 Liberals, 5 PQ and 1 QS. The CAQ is not a factor here.

Mises-à-jour: Gel des tarifs d'Hydro proposé par le PQ

Le cadre financier du PQ, que j'ai comparé avec ceux de la CAQ et du PLQ ici et ici, n'incluait pas sa promesse de geler les tarifs d'électricité. Les deux billets ci-dessus ont maintenant été mis à jour avec les effets de cette promesse.

On constate que les plateformes du PQ et de la CAQ deviennent alors très similaires aux niveaux du coût total des engagements (environ 3,6 milliards par année à terme) ainsi que d'une grande partie des mesures de financement prévues (dans les deux cas, coupures de 2 milliards, hausse de l'impôt sur les dividendes et des gains en capital). Le PLQ se distingue par le faible coût de ses engagements (1,1 milliards), la modestie des coupes prévues (0,6 milliards) et l'absence de hausses d'impôts.

Les trois partis tentent de paraître plus responsables qu'ils ne le sont:
PQ: non-inclusion du coût du gel des tarifs d'électricité (1,6 milliards par année à terme);
CAQ: lunettes roses quant à la croissance des recettes du gouvernement (1,5 milliards par année à terme);
PLQ: prétendre que les réserves pour éventualités s'accumulent en confondant le montant par année et le montant cumulatif, surtout que ces réserves n'existent pas à partir de 2014-2015.

Il est donc presque certain que les Québécois auront de mauvaises surprises (comme la hausse de la TVQ et la taxe santé), mais cette fois, même sans une récession mondiale...

PQ on the Cusp of a Majority, but CAQ Could Win

Two province-wide polls have been conducted in Québec since last week's four debates. Both give 33% to the PQ and 28% to the CAQ. The Liberals trail at 26-27%.

If the popular vote reflects these results, we could be in for a long election night: the PQ would likely be close to the majority threshold - but on which side, we don't know. It might appear surprising that the PQ can achieve a majority with just 33%, but remember that leading the francophone vote is what counts in Québec because there are many similar ridings that "swing" together. The federal NDP, of course, was a big beneficiary of this in 2011.

For the same reason, the CAQ would lose many tight races, and would be at risk of finishing in third place in terms of seats despite beating the Liberals in the popular vote. With current poll numbers, I'd say that the PQ would win 60-65 seats, the Liberals and the CAQ around 30 each, and 1 or 2 for QS.

However, even though these poll numbers give the PQ about twice as many seats as the CAQ, the CAQ still has a real shot at winning government: it trails by only 5%. The CAQ's predecessor tended to be underestimated in the polls. Indeed, in the 2007 election, which bears some resemblance to this one, the ADQ got 30.8% on election night despite being pegged at 25-26% in the last surveys of the campaign. Moreover, although the PQ has actually not been overestimated recently, its support this year relies disproportionately on young voters, who are notoriously unreliable. On the other hand, the CAQ has virtually no get-out-the-vote operation due to its limited means.

To further complicate the situation, many believe that the Liberals will do better than forecast on election night, since many voters may be ashamed to admit voting Liberal due to the anti-Charest hysteria. However, the Liberals are completely out of the picture among francophones, and it will be very difficult for them to get first place. Their only chance is if there's a virtual three-way tie on election night, with all three main parties getting around 40 seats, but that'd require a perfect storm.

In summary, many scenarios are plausible. I'd say that the most likely ones are as follows:
1. PQ minority, CAQ OO
2. PQ majority, Liberal OO
3. PQ minority, Liberal OO
4. CAQ minority, PQ OO

To win a majority, the PQ needs to win lots of tight races against the CAQ, so unless the PQ wins a wafer-thin majority (which, to be sure, could well happen), we will not have a PQ majority with a CAQ OO. Unless Marois commits a huge gaffe, I do not see the CAQ getting a majority, and I also do not see the PQ falling below the Liberals.

Crédibilité des cadres financiers

Mise-à-jour: J'ajoute le coût du gel des tarifs d'électricité, proposé par le PQ, mais ne figurant pas dans son cadre financier.

Dans un billet précédent, j'ai comparé les cadres financiers des trois principaux partis en acceptant leurs chiffres. Mais ces chiffres sont-ils crédibles?

En général, les partis politiques chiffrent bien le coût de leurs engagements spécifiques: il n'y a pas vraiment possibilité de jouer avec le coût d'une place en garderie ou d'un crédit d'impôt, par exemples. On peut donc être assez confiant qu'effectivement, le PLQ a fait environ 1 milliards de promesses, le PQ 2 millards (mais 3-4 milliards avec le gel des tarifs d'Hydro), et la CAQ 3-4 milliards.

Ça se gâte un peu lorsqu'on examine les revenus générés par les augmentations d'impôts. En général, on assume que bien qu'un taux d'imposition augmente, la base taxable ne change pas. Cela peut être problématique: par exemple, si on taxe trop une minière, elle peut décider de cesser ses opérations; les gens et les entreprises peuvent déménager ou décider de travailler ou d'investir moins. Les 194 millions nets que le PQ veut percevoir des minières sont donc douteux. Il en va de même pour les 416 millions que la CAQ compte récupérer par la réduction de moitié de l'inclusion partielles des gains en capital puisque le PQ, qui propose la même mesure, ne compte récupérer que 255 millions. Match nul, donc, entre la CAQ et le PQ. Le PLQ n'est pas sujet à ce problème, puisqu'il ne propose pas d'augmentation d'impôt.

Mais la portion des cadres financiers qui suscite le plus de doutes, c'est la réduction de la croissance des dépenses sur les programmes existants. En effet, le dernier budget ne prévoit qu'une augmentation moyenne de 3% au cours des cinq prochines années, ce qui est à peu près égal à la somme de l'inflation et de la croissance de la population. Cela est déjà très optimiste, puisque le vieillissement de la population entraînera une croissance encore plus rapide des dépenses en santé.

De ce côté, la CAQ prévoit des économies de 2,1 milliards de dollars. De la pensée magique, dit le PQ, qui propose pourtant, à terme (en 2017-18), de couper 2 milliards lui-même en limitant le taux de croissance à 2,4%! On peut voir que la CAQ et le PQ prévoient des coupes similaires, mais la CAQ a au moins un plan, aussi imparfait soit-il. Cependant, la CAQ propose additionnellement de couper 0,6 milliards dans les dépenses des organismes non-budgétaires. Encore une fois, je dirais match nul entre la CAQ et le PQ. Le PLQ est plus réaliste, ne proposant de couper que 0,7 milliards.

Finalement, la CAQ a fait une chose que les autres partis n'ont pas fait: déclarer que les prévisions du budget en matière de revenus sont trop pessimistes. (En fait, il semblerait que la croissance économique cette année soit moins forte que prévue dans le budget.) En 2017-18, cela donne 1,5 milliards de plus à la CAQ, sans aucun effort! Soit la CAQ a tort, dans lequel cas il y a un manque à gagner, soit elle a raison, dans lequel cas le PQ et le PLQ ferait un beau surplus!

Au final, on constate que le PLQ a les chiffres les plus crédibles et prudents, suivis du PQ, et finalement de la CAQ. Cependant, si Pauline Marois a raison que les coupes de 2,1 milliards de la CAQ sont de la "pensée magique", ses propres coupes de 2 milliards le seraient aussi. Est-ce pour cela que le PQ n'a pas dévoilé son cadre financier avant les débats?

En enlevant tous les chiffres douteux que j'ai répertoriés ci-dessus, les coûts nets réels des engagements sont les suivants:
PQ: 1,0 milliard (mais 2,6 milliards avec le gel des tarifs d'Hydro)
CAQ: 3,1 milliards
PLQ: 1,1 milliards
On peut cependant croire que la CAQ va probablement réussir à couper plus que le PQ ou le PLQ, même s'il n'atteint pas son objectif de 2,1 milliards. L'écart entre la CAQ et les deux autres partis devrait donc être moins élevé qui ces chiffres n'indiquent, et la CAQ pourrait même faire mieux que le PQ.

À noter que pour faire les contributions prévues au Fonds des générations, il fallait plutôt créer un excédent de 0,9 milliard...

Il faut préciser que malgré des chiffres relativement crédibles, le cadre financier du PLQ n'est pas pour autant fiable. Comme je l'ai mentionné précédemment, même si toutes les projections des libéraux se réalisent, le PLQ ne parviendra pas à contribuer les montants prévus au Fonds des générations sans faire de déficit, comme il le prétend. La CAQ, qui a le même objectif, n'y parviendra que si ses coupes se matérialisent ET si les revenus du gouvernement croissent plus rapidement que dans le budget. Le PQ a tout simplement abandonné le Fonds des générations, anticipant qu'il n'y aura pas assez d'argent pour faire les contributions prévues à ce Fonds; avec le gel des tarifs d'Hydro, c'est le cas même s'il implémente les coupes promises.

Comparaison des cadres financiers

Le PQ a dévoilé son cadre financier aujourd'hui. Pour se faire une idée globale des plateformes des partis en matière fiscale, il faut les comparer. Or, les cadres financiers sont présentés de différentes manières; on a donc besoin de les mettre dans un format commun. C'est un travail important qui, malheureusement, est difficile à trouver dans les médias. Je me suis donc penché sur la question.

Le point de départ de tous les cadres, ce sont les prévisions du budget 2012-2013 du gouvernement du Québec. En voici les grandes lignes (en millions de dollars):

Surplus réels (avant contribution au Fonds des générations et réserves pour éventualités)
2012-13: -289
2013-14: 1 241
2014-15: 700
2015-16: 1 155
2016-17: 1 629

Contributions prévues au Fonds des générations:
2012-13: 911
2013-14: 1 041
2014-15: 1 575
2015-16: 2 030
2016-17: 2 504

Marge de manoeuvre (si positif) ou manque à gagner (si négatif)
2012-13: -1 200*
2013-14: 200**
2014-15: -875
2015-16: -875
2016-17: -875
*Solde budgétaire de -1 500 en raison d'une réserve de 300.
**Solde budgétaire de 0 en raison d'une réserve de 200.

Et voici les cadres financiers des trois grands partis, présentés selon un format commun. Tous les chiffres représentent l'impact financier, à terme, sur un an, en millions de dollars
Mise-à-jour: J'ai ajouté une estimation des réductions de dépenses non-spécifiées pour le PQ et le PLQ, donc l'impact n'est pas chiffré dans les tableaux de leur cadre financier.
Mise-à-jour #2: La promesse du PQ d'annuler la hausse des tarifs d'électricité n'est pas incluse dans son cadre fiscal. Cette promesse coûterait 1,6 milliards par an. Je donne maintenant l'analyse avec ce coût.


PQ

Nouvelles dépenses: 748
Annulations d'augmentations de tarifs: 197 (environ 1 797 avec le gel des tarifs d'électricité)
Réductions d'impôt: 1 005
Crédits d'impôt: 47
COÛT DES ENGAGEMENTS: 1 997 (environ 3 597 avec le gel des tarifs d'électricité)

Augmentations d'impôt (riches, gains en capital, dividendes): 1 005
Augmentations des redevances minières: 388
Perte en péréquation: -194
COÛT NET DES ENGAGEMENTS: 798 (environ 2 397 avec le gel des tarifs d'électricité)

Réductions de dépenses non-spécifiées*: 1 240 (en 2016-2017)
COÛT NET DE LA PLATEFORME: -442 (environ 1 158 avec le gel des tarifs d'électricité)

*Limitation de l'augmentation des dépenses des programmes existants à 2,4% par année, au lieu de 1,8% pour 2013-14, 3,0% pour 2014-15 et 3,4% par la suite


CAQ

Nouvelles dépenses: 1 836
Réductions d'impôt: 1 804
Crédits d'impôt: 23
COÛT DES ENGAGEMENTS: 3 663

Augmentations d'impôt (gains en capital, dividendes): 543
Réductions des crédits d'impôt des entreprises: 200
Réductions de dépenses spécifiées: 2 100
COÛT NET DES ENGAGEMENTS: 820

Réductions de dépenses non-spécifiées*: 551 (en 2016-2017)
COÛT NET DE LA PLATEFORME: 269

*Limitation de l'augmentation des dépenses des organismes autres que budgétaires à la croissance du PIB nominal


PLQ

Nouvelles dépenses: 713
Réductions d'impôt: 60
Crédits d'impôt: 301
COÛT DES ENGAGEMENTS: 1 074

COÛT NET DES ENGAGEMENTS: 1 074 

Réductions de dépenses non-spécifiées*: 654 (en 2016-2017)
COÛT NET DE LA PLATEFORME: 420

*Limitation de l'augmentation des dépenses des programmes existants à 2% en 2014-15, au lieu de 3%


On peut tirer plusieurs enseignements de cet exercice:

1. La CAQ est la championne des nouvelles dépenses. Cependant, elle propose des réductions de dépenses encore plus élevées, contrairement au PQ et au PLQ, qui n'ont spécifié aucune économie. Donc, au total, les dépenses seraient les plus basses sous la CAQ.

2. La CAQ est le seul parti qui propose des réductions nettes significatives d'impôt: 1,26 milliards de dollars par année à terme. Le PQ finance entièrement l'abolition de la taxe santé avec l'augmentation de l'impôt sur les revenus élevés, les dividendes et les gains en capital. Le PLQ ne donne qu'une baisse d'impôt sur les ventes d'entreprises familiales. À noter que toutes les réductions proposées portent sur l'impôt des particuliers plutôt que sur l'impôt des sociétés.

3. Le PLQ propose, de loin, le plus de nouveaux crédits d'impôt et transferts aux particuliers (prime au travail, aide à la rentrée, travailleurs expérimentés, rénovation verte, etc.). Le PQ propose plutôt de geler les frais de scolarité et de garde.

4. Le coût total des engagements est le plus élevé chez la CAQ, suivie par le PQ et le PLQ. (Mais le PQ s'approche de la CAQ si on inclut le gel des tarifs d'Hydro.) Pour ce qui est du coût net, il est d'entre 0,8 et 1,1 milliards par année pour les trois partis - c'est donc très semblable SI on exclut le gel péquiste des tarifs d'Hydro. Si ce gel est inclus, cependant, le PQ a des engagements qui vont coûter beaucoup plus cher.

5. Tous les partis sont en voie d'atteindre l'équilibre budgétaire global (avant de contribuer au Fonds des générations) malgré leurs promesses. Le PLQ et la CAQ le feraient même sans les coupes cachées. Cependant, aucun des partis ne sera en mesure de réduire la dette autant que les contributions prévues au Fonds des générations, même avec les coupes cachées.

Le PQ promet d'abolir le Fonds des générations, qui force le gouvernement à rembourser la dette (si le budget est équilibré après avoir contribué au Fonds, c'est qu'il est en fait en surplus). Son cadre financier promet de continuer à rembourser la dette, mais cela se fait en grande partie avec les coupes non-spécifiées, qui sont le double de ce que proposent le PLQ et la CAQ. Sans le Fonds des générations, il serait facile politiquement pour le PQ de ralentir ou d'arrêter le remboursement de la dette, puisqu'il aurait quand même des budgets dits équilibrés. La tentation sera très grande, parce que, si on inclut le gel des tarifs d'électricité, le PQ a promis plus que les surplus prévus avant les contributions au Fonds. Pourtant, si on veut pouvoir faire des déficits dans 10-20 ans (et on en aura besoin si on veut préserver le système de santé), il faut réduire la dette maintenant parce que le Québec a peu de marge de manoeuvre!

Par contre, le PLQ et la CAQ promettent de contribuer plus que prévu au Fonds des générations. Comment est-ce possible, considérant que seulement pour atteindre les contributions prévues, il faut un resserrement budgétaire annuel de 875 millions à partir de 2014-2015, alors que leurs cadres financiers proposent l'inverse? Le PLQ prétend pouvoir le faire en confondant l'augmentation annuelle de ses dépenses avec l'augmentation de ses dépenses annuelles - c'est soit de l'incompétence, soit de la malhonnêteté. La CAQ, pour sa part, estime que les prévisions du budget 2012-2013 sont trop pessimistes, et qu'il y aura donc plus d'argent que prévu - autrement dit, de la "pensée magique".

Alors voilà. J'espère que cette analyse vous aidera à faire un choix éclairé. À noter que j'ai accepté tels quels les chiffres des partis politiques. Si j'ai le temps, j'écrirai un autre billet (plus subjectif) sur la crédibilité de ces chiffres.

PQ Retraction

The PQ just issued a statement: all "Québec citizens" will have the right to run, including non-francophones automatically granted Québec citizenship, i.e. Canadian citizens living in Québec when the law comes into force and their descendants. I still disagree with the project, but at least anyone that currently has the right to run would keep it.

Of course, this begs the question: Was Marois hopelessly confused? Or was the PQ actually floating a trial balloon to see how people would react to denying fundamental democratic rights to a minority? Either way, not reassuring...

Too Far

Well, this is going too far. The PQ is tightening the criteria for its proposed Québec citizenship. The highlights:

There would be three types of Canadian citizens in Québec:
1. Non-Québec citizens
2. Québec citizens that don't speak French
3. Québec citizens that speak French

Only Québec citizens can:
- Contribute to a provincial, municipal or school board campaign
- Present a petition to the National Assembly

Only Québec citizens that speak French can:
- Be a candidate at a provincial, municipal or school board election

There are three ways of acquiring Québec citizenship:
1. Be a Canadian citizen living in Québec when the law comes into effect
2. Be born to a Québec citizen
3. Apply and satisfy all three of the following:
a) Have lived in Québec as a Canadian citizen for the three months preceding the application
b) Have lived in Québec for a total of six months
c) Have an appropriate knowledge of French and the rights and duties of Québec citizens

So, in particular:
- First Nations Quebecers that do not speak French would be barred from running in a municipal election. (Talk about newcomers respecting natives' heritage!)
- The same goes for Anglophones in the West Island.
- Canadians from elsewhere moving to Québec would be barred from donating to a provincial political party if they do not speak French.

This is almost certainly unconstitutional, and would likely violate clauses in the Constitution that the Notwithstanding Clause cannot override. Still, this shows the PQ's willingness to go much farther than it has ever gone in terms of the French language.

Update: The PQ is going back to its original, less controversial proposal. See this post.

Québec's Parties: A Primer and My Thoughts

As you know, an election campaign is ongoing in my former province of Québec. I am just following this campaign as a "normal" citizen, and not making seat projections. Here are some thoughts on the parties and their positions. I will likely do another post later on this campaign's electoral dynamics, which are fascinating.

- Liberal Party of Québec: A very tired government that has been plagued with ethics issues. The Liberals' strategy is threefold:
1. present themselves as the party of the economy;
2. show that the other main parties are as dirty as they are;
3. convince voters that they are the only reliably federalist option.

On point 1, I have to agree that the Liberals' platform is probably the best (or rather, the least bad) for Québec's economy. However, their fiscal plan is dishonest: they say that they are going to pay for their promises, which, once they're enacted, will cost over $1.2 billion/year, with the budget's $300 million/year contingency reserves. By their "logic," the contingency reserves total $1.5 billion, which covers the new spending... On point 2, it was somewhat surprising that during the debates, the other leaders were not able to score points on the corruption issues, which does suggest that the other leaders have skeletons in their closets. However, as the party that has been in power for the past 9 years, the Liberals will be held mainly responsible for the situation. Finally, Jean Charest is mocking CAQ leader François Legault's recent conversion to being a federalist, and says that he might switch back. This makes sense: as things stand, both the Liberals and the CAQ are federalist and centre-right, so Charest needs to create separation between the parties, or many dissatisfied Liberals will decide to go for the new thing.

- Parti Québécois: A team with many star candidates that fully expects to be Québec's next government. The main pillars of the PQ's strategy:
1. be THE party of the French language and Québec identity;
2. stay vague on whether a referendum will be held;
3. have a vague economic platform.

Just about the only major clear thing in the PQ's platform is that it will extend "Bill" 101 to colleges (grades 12 and 13) and to firms employing 11 to 50 employees. This project would have a destructive impact on Montreal's non-francophone communities, from English-speaking colleges who would lose much of their enrollment to Chinese restaurants that will have to shrink or close unless their staff learns French. Also, the PQ wants to adopt a secular charter that would more or less prohibit displays of religious symbols in public institutions and by their staffs - but it would make an exception for the cross in the National Assembly because it's part of Québec's heritage. At the same time, the PQ wants to remove from the National Assembly symbols of the monarchy, which, of course, are also part of Québec's heritage... Having grown up in Québec, I can say that most PQ supporters are not racist: they genuinely bear no ill will towards minorities, and just want to protect their language and their culture. However, the PQ has taken this very (too?) far this time around, and it is more probably more ethno-centric that it has been in a generation, or maybe ever. "All of us are Quebecers, but some more than others" seems to be the message.

The PQ is staying vague on everything else because it is ahead in the polls. It needs both the vote of the hardcore separatists (who now have other options like Québec Solidaire and Option Nationale) and of the separatists who don't want a referendum now (who might be tempted to vote for the CAQ). It is also a big tent party economically, and is being squeezed on the left by QS and ON and on the right by the CAQ. In keeping with its centre-left orientation, the PQ has a few lefty goodies in store, but they are relatively minor.

- Coalition Avenir Québec: This is a new party that can have a broad appeal. It is neither the Liberals nor the PQ, at a time many Quebecers want change. It is federalist (for now), but more nationalist than the Liberals. It has right-wing roots from swallowing the ADQ, but its actual platform is rather centrist, if with a populist/reformist bent (e.g. save on administrative costs by getting rid of school boards and regional health authorities).

The CAQ's main weakness is the quality of its team. Its leader François Legault is well-known and relatively well-respected (at least by today's standards for a politician). His lieutenant Jacques Duchesnau is an outspoken critic of corruption, but prone to making exaggerated statements, and hasn't always worked well with others. Gaétan Barrette, the prospective Health minister, is a controversial figure. Apart from these three and former ADQ leader Gérard Deltell (who is rather well-liked, but not that well-known), Quebecers don't know much about CAQ candidates. This is especially a problem due to the CAQ's proposals for systemic reforms: such measures tend to have unintended consequences, and Quebecers are worried that the CAQ team might end up making one big mess.

- Québec Solidaire: A left-wing and idealistic party - a separatist version of what the federal NDP used to be before becoming a major contender. One of QS's two spokespersons (the party does not have a "leader") was elected in 2008. To achieve sovereignty in the right way, it wants to create a citizen's assembly to write a prospective constitution and launch a vast consultation and social debate leading up to a referendum (as opposed to the PQ's quick 30-day referendum campaign). It is likely the biggest "clean" party, and the most likeable party in Québec. However, when you look at their economic platform, you wonder if they live in an alternative universe where all jobs are either in the public sector or created with public subsidies. QS has a shot in a few eastern Montreal ridings, and may be a spoiler for the PQ elsewhere.

- Option Nationale: A one-man show in the crowded left-wing separatist space (more hardcore separatist than both PQ and QS, between the two economically). The man in question, Jean-Martin Aussant, was elected under the PQ banner in 2008, but became disgruntled with Pauline Marois' leadership. ON will only be a factor in Aussant's own riding.

No other party, including the Greens, is likely to win a seat.

PQ In-Fighting Opens Door to Legault

A Québec provincial poll suggests that the centre-right party proposed by François Legault has 40% support against 26% for the Liberals, 17% for the PQ and 8% for the ADQ. Just like for the NDP, such a result would give Mr. Legault a commanding majority.

Of course, as Legault gets more scrutiny, his support may wane, though that didn't happen with the NDP. Still, these results imply that 74% of the Québec electorate is ready to vote for a right-of-centre party. This is consistent with the analysis that Québec's NDP vote on May 2 was for change rather than for a left-wing agenda.

Even without Legault's new party, the PQ would lose by 6% to the Liberals (29-35). It goes without saying that the recent crisis has greatly damaged Marois' party.

Note: Sorry for the lack of posting in the past month - three major life events that normally only occur every few years and lots of traveling have taken their toll. Posting will likely remain limited for the next three months, but hopefully there won't be any more whole-month gaps.

Meanwhile, in Québec Politics

The spokesperson of Québec Solidaire, a far-left separatist provincial party in Québec with one MNA and 11% support according to the latest Léger poll, proposes to "limit economic growth." The party also wants a $16/hour minimum wage. That's more than the average wage of all workers in "sales and service occupation" (as defined by Statistics Canada), which comprise more than 25% of all employees in Canada.

The NDP looks positively right-wing by comparison...

Charest Plans to Seek a Fourth Term in Québec

That's what the Premier of La Belle Province declared to the CBC.

Can he win again? Although things look bleak for the Québec Liberals at this point, they had been similarly unpopular during their first term, only to escape with a minority government in 2007. That's due both to the Liberals recovering from their lows late in the term, and to the ADQ push, which prevented the PQ from getting the bulk of the dissatisfied vote, as they would normally have. The former can certainly happen again - we're still more than 2 years away from the next ballot - but the latter, a strong push by a third party, appears unlikely at this point.

The question, then, is: without a third party to spoil things for the PQ, can the Liberals recover enough to win a fourth time in a row? Of course, anything is possible in politics in a two-year span, but I think there is real Charest fatigue in Québec at this point. Unless the economy continues to rebound strongly in the next two years, I doubt Charest can pull it off again. And since I think the recovery will slow quite soon (though Canada will likely avoid a double dip - I don't know if the US will), I expect Québec to have its first female premier in 2013.

Quick Word about Québec

If you think we have a crappy federal government with no good alternatives, look at Québec and rejoice!

The Charest government has been refusing to hold a public inquiry on the corrupt construction sector, whose firms and unions have infiltrated virtually all spheres of public decision-making, or so it seems. Meanwhile, the healthcare system is once again in crisis - almost 7 years after the Québec Liberals were elected to fix it, and, much like in Ottawa, there is no credible plan to erase the deficit. The federal Tories might be just as limp and complacent (and much more gimmicky and juvenile), but at least they don't face any crisis nearly as important as the healthcare or construction ones in Québec.

The PQ is rightfully demanding a public inquiry on the construction sector. But the supposedly substantive things it has been doing are rather ridiculous:
- reviving a debate about the display of religious symbols by public employees to take the populist islamophobic vote away from the dying ADQ (that's surely Québec's biggest problem now!);
- saying right-wing (for Québec) sounding things (e.g. the PQ will now focus on wealth creation through the individual) while proposing the same old big government programs.
The federal Liberals might not have a concrete plan for a liberal Canada, but the PQ, after deciding that it will not ask for a referendum for the foreseeable future, doesn't even know what kind of Québec it wants; as a result, the PQ is trying to be a populist progressive individualist socialist party.

So in Ottawa, we have a vaguely centre-right party and a vaguely centre-left party. Neither of them has a crisp plan, but you can kind of see the direction in which the country would move - at an excruciatingly slow pace - under either of them. In Quebec City, it's worse: literally a party that stands for nothing versus a party that stands for everything - a choice between complete paralysis and a random direction.

Still, 99% of Quebecers (and I include myself in the bunch) are perfectly happy now, due to the Habs' 6-game winning streak!