News

Considering how roughly the Parti Québécois has treated much more respected leaders in the past, André Boisclair could be the first political boss to look for a new job after yesterday's historic vote.

Mr. Boisclair managed less than 29 per cent of the popular vote, the lowest score since the PQ came of age in 1976.

His eyes ringed with fatigue, he tried to soothe his supporters. "Only a few seats separate us from power," he said last night. "Only a few thousand votes. But democracy spoke."

Under his tenure, the PQ's monolithic grip on the nationalist vote cracked. He was miscast, the wrong man for the current mood in Quebec politics.

The flame for sovereignty in Quebec has dimmed, he conceded. However, he added, "this flame is present. Our movement is well anchored. We are millions of Quebeckers who want to make of our people a country."

He pledged to provide a responsible, attentive opposition.

Trying to balance his separatist convictions with the electoral results, he said he had a duty "to keep that flame open, to keep the doors open to Quebec's development, for its future, for the place it has within the Canadian whole, but also the place it has in the world."

At the PQ campaign rally at a club in a gritty part of Montreal, the crowd was sparse. Diehards chanted: "We want a country!" But a more representative moment was a television snippet earlier of Mr. Boisclair watching the results, looking grim and long-faced.

PQ caucus members who spoke to the media argued that Mr. Boisclair had been sideswiped by something unusual that also knocked over the Liberals.

"Before throwing stones at Mr. Boisclair, look at what's happened everywhere," Agnès Maltais said.

The attention will likely turn to Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe, the most seasoned separatist leader, and often touted as a possible successor to Mr. Boisclair.

But the PQ's raison d'être -- achieving Quebec independence -- was dealt a blow last night.

The success of Mario Dumont's Action Démocratique du Québec broke a key tenet on which the PQ had long staked its fortunes: that there is a so-called consensus Québécois, with Quebeckers overwhelmingly being social democrats, progressive and eager for independence.

And Mr. Duceppe's currency has diminished lately in the face of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's popularity. If he leaves now, it would be a blow to the Bloc on the eve of a possible federal election.

On the face of it, Mr. Boisclair didn't have a bad campaign. He made no major gaffes. He gave snappy speeches, curbing his old tendency to speak in technocratic jargon. He held his own during the leaders debate. It made no difference. He was trounced.

In the final weekend of the election campaign, Mr. Boisclair suggested that, in a minority government, the ADQ could ally itself with the PQ in pushing for a referendum campaign.

The rejection was quick. "[Mr. Boisclair] is like a drowning man pulling someone down with him," Mr. Dumont said then. "We don't want to sink with him."

Separatists often take comfort in noting that support for independence remains high, usually 10 to 15 points higher than the PQ's popularity.

However, as University of Sherbrooke political scientist Jean-Herman Guay has noted, supporting sovereignty has different meanings to different people.

There are people for whom separation is a necessity. For others, it is optional. They would vote Yes if there was a referendum, but it is not a priority for them.

Midway into the campaign, Mr. Boisclair was trying to consolidate his core vote, mending bridges with trade unions and urging all left-wing voters to close ranks around him to stem the right-wing ADQ tide.

But that call also underlined the PQ's challenges. In the absence of the old federalist-separatist polarization, the party is still relying on its stalwart elements as it dithers over whether to reposition itself toward the centre of the political spectrum.

The last referendum, in 1995, was such an emotional affair that many Quebeckers feel a third plebiscite would be the last one for a very long time -- putting pressure on sovereigntists not to engage in one unless the odds are sharply in their favour.