MONTREAL — The mention of Jacques Parizeau over the past two decades has sent a shiver through members of the Jewish community, not only because of his hardline separatism, but also because they felt he really meant Jews when he blamed ethnics and money for the 1995 sovereignty referendum defeat.
Many years lapsed before Parizeau offered any clear explanation for his outburst on that fraught October night, intemperate words that led to his resignation as premier the following January. Certainly, he never retracted or apologized or even attempted to mollify.
In 2013, he did say that his remarks, which also spoke of “us” and “them,” were not directed at Quebecers of a specific origin, but rather the coalition of Jewish, Greek and Italian organizations that actively worked for the “No” side during what was a long, bitter campaign.
“The common front of the Italian, Greek and Jewish congresses [Canadian Jewish Congress] was politically active in an extraordinary way in the ‘No’ camp and had formidable success,” he told Montreal radio station 98.5 FM. “It was very efficient.”
The “No” side won, but barely, with just over 50.5 per cent of the vote.
But that is not dwelt upon by Congress’ successor, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, in its laudatory statement after Parizeau’s death on June 1 at age 84.
“With the disappearance of Jacques Parizeau, Quebec loses one of its great men, those who, following the example of Jean Lesage and René Lévesque, built modern Quebec and left a deep impression on their peers.
“Artisan of the Quiet Revolution, Mr. Parizeau decisively contributed to the opening up of Quebec. Monument of the sovereigntist movement, Mr. Parizeau never ceased to be an authentic democrat and always respected the voices of Quebecers, despite his regrettable remarks on the result of the referendum vote of 1995.”
Lawrence Bergman, who was D’Arcy McGee’s Liberal MNA from 1994 to 2014, said Parizeau “had one goal, and that was what brought him into politics, to separate Quebec from Canada. That was the driving force of his political career.”
For Parizeau, Bergman believes, “the ends justified the means, no matter what the cost, and without telling Quebecers the consequences or the tactics. We all remember his famous remark about ‘lobsters in the pot,’” a reference to his comment that Quebecers would be trapped in the aftermath of a successful referendum.
On the positive side, Bergman said Parizeau, an economist who served as finance minister, has to be credited for helping to create such key public financial levers as the Caisse de depot et placement and the Société génerale de financement, which have advanced the province’s economy.
Bergman said he never had any personal encounter with Parizeau, who became premier in the election when Bergman was first took office, after Parizeau had served as PQ leader since 1988. He also cannot recall Parizeau’s having any relationship as such with the Jewish community, or any Jewish friends.
The one exception was his Polish-born first wife, Alice Poznanska, who died in 1990. She had a Jewish background, although her funeral was held at a Catholic church.
There was also one segment of the Jewish community that Parizeau won over. The chassidic Tash community openly supported the “Yes” side in the referendum and welcomed Parizeau and his wife, Lisette Lapointe, to their enclave in Boisbriand like visiting royalty during the campaign.
Parizeau did swim against the Parti Québécois tide in the acrimonious debate over the Pauline Marois government’s proposed charter of Quebec values.
In an October 2013 column in the Journal de Montréal, he wrote that banning public sector employees from wearing religious symbols went too far. He accused the government of over-reacting out of an exaggerated fear of the spread of Islam. He proposed that only police, judges, prosecutors and others in a position of state authority not be permitted to wear religious headgear or ornaments.
A revealing memoir published in 2005 by former PQ cabinet minister Richard Le Hir claimed that Parizeau reneged on a promise to meet with Jewish community leaders, who were worried about their institutions when the PQ was re-elected after nine years out of office.
Le Hir said he was approached by Jewish leaders to act as a go-between with Parizeau because he was seen as a friend of the community.
Le Hir said that when he broached the subject, Parizeau launched into a diatribe about the difficult relations he always had with the Jewish community and blamed Charles Bronfman for contributing to the defeat of the “Yes” side in the first referendum in 1980. (Bronfman had, in fact, made no public comments during that campaign.)
The premier, he says, finally agreed to the meeting on the condition Bronfman remain silent during the referendum campaign that Parizeau made clear would soon be called.
“Listen, if Charles Bronfman stays quiet during the referendum campaign, I will be ready to meet with leaders of the Jewish community. Pass the message,” Le Hir quotes Parizeau as saying.
Le Hir met with Bronfman’s right-hand man, then-senator Leo Kolber, who told him Bronfman was not the type to allow anyone to dictate how he behaved.
In any event, Bronfman did not say anything publicly during the 1995 referendum campaign, whether or not he knew of Parizeau’s demand.
Le Hir says he reminded Parizeau of the bargain a few weeks before the vote, but the premier said he had to concentrate on winning over soft nationalists, and, anyway, “[cabinet minister Bernard] Landry is dealing with the Jews.”
Landry was known to have a good rapport with the community and a number of Jewish friends.
Le Hir told The CJN at the time that he felt Parizeau not only missed an opportunity to repair relations, but acted in an insulting way toward the community.
The late writer Mordecai Richler got back at Parizeau in his own inimitable way in 1996. He created the Prix Parizeau, a satiric bouquet to the resigned premier that was awarded annually for a few years afterward to a deserving “ethnic” Quebec writer.