How Quebec's opposition managed to keep the Legault government in check

Premier François Legault was hoping to pass a sweeping stimulus bill that would have given his government exceptional powers. But the opposition wasn't having it.

Premier put democracy to the test with stimulus bill that would have given his government wide-ranging powers

Premier François Legault said his government needed these powers because there was an 'urgency for us to put people to work.' (Jacques Boissinot/The Canadian Press)

Since the ancient Roman republic, democracies have recognized the need to occasionally suspend their usual procedures and give leaders exceptional powers in order to deal with emergencies.

Unshackled from their usual restrictions, leaders could take the wide-ranging action needed to save the democracy from whatever disaster loomed — be it war, civil unrest or plague. 

When the disaster had passed, the normal balance of power could resume. This, at least, is the reasoning that informs the federal Emergencies Act and its predecessor, the War Measures Act: sometimes you need to put democracy on hold to avoid an even bigger crisis. 

More recently — especially since Sept. 11, 2001 — political scientists, legal scholars and human rights advocates have worried about the reluctance of governments to relinquish temporary emergency powers they have claimed for themselves.

Bill 61 lists around 200 infrastructure projects, including Montreal's light rail network, that the government wants to accelerate. (Paul Chiasson/The Canadian Press)

To borrow a phrase from the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, the tendency in modern states is for "the norm to become indistinguishable from the exception." 

Bill 61, tabled on June 3 by the Quebec government, exposed the province to this danger.

Ostensibly a stimulus package, Bill 61 sought to suspend normal checks and balances on government power for an indeterminate amount of time.

The emergency powers in Quebec's Public Health Act are already extremely broad. It is under these powers, for instance, that police are able to hand out heavy fines for failing to respect distancing guidelines.

But the emergency powers must be renewed either every 10 days by executive order, or every 30 days if passed by the legislature — a mechanism meant to ensure these illiberal dispositions aren't used longer than strictly necessary. 

In the original provisions of Bill 61, the Coalition Avenir Québec government sought to remove the time limit to the extraordinary powers it's had available since declaring a public health emergency on March 13. 

In addition to extending the state of emergency indefinitely, Bill 61 was to give the government the ability to bypass rules about awarding infrastructure contracts, and it weakened several environmental regulations.

Premier François Legault said his government needed these powers because there was an "urgency for us to put people to work."

Treasury Board President Christian Dubé tabled more than a dozen amendments to Bill 61 on Thursday, hoping to secure support from the opposition. (Sylvain Roy Roussel/CBC)

Boring old parliamentary procedure

The current version of Bill 61 looks fairly different from what was tabled last week, thanks to more than a dozen amendments the government proposed on Thursday. 

Gone is the provision for an open-ended state of emergency, replaced with a proposal to extend the declaration to Oct. 1. Gone, too, is the sweeping power to grant some government contracts without tender.

So what happened in the week since the bill was tabled? Parliament is what happened. Boring, old legislative procedures that force the government to hear from stakeholders and experts before voting on a bill.

The government needs the support of the opposition before Bill 61 can move from the committee stage to the floor of the National Assembly for a vote. But Opposition Leader Dominique Anglade said the Liberals still aren't satisfied with the bill. (Jacques Boissinot/The Canadian Press)

In testimony on Wednesday, the Barreau du Québec said the province's legal community is deeply concerned about the unlimited extension of emergency measures. 

"These wide-ranging measures need to have a counter-weight, one that strikes a balance between the routine rules provided by law and the exceptional measures the government could impose during a pandemic," said the head of the bar, Paul-Matthieu Grondin.

Quebec's ombudsman and a committee of anti-corruption experts both warned that by removing the tendering process for contracts, the government would create ideal conditions for dodgy deals and cost overruns. 

"The bill goes against all the best practices of sound management of public funds," said the expert committee, which was struck after the Charbonneau commission uncovered widespread criminal activity in the province's construction industry. 

Add to these concerns a growing list of angry columnists and particularly irate opposition parties — it quickly became clear to the government it had to make concessions.

Keeping exception from becoming the norm

The National Assembly adjourned Friday afternoon until Sept. 15, with a united opposition still refusing to pass Bill 61. 

Without the support of the opposition, the government could not move the bill from the committee stage to the floor of the National Assembly for a vote.

Despite the proposed changes, the opposition is still unsatisfied with the bill, which they argue is a power grab by the CAQ.

Among the other issues they've highlighted are its focus on the male-dominated construction industry and the nakedly partisan choice of the infrastructure projects the government wants to streamline.

Legault himself, in announcing the bill, acknowledged a majority of the projects would be in ridings held by his party in order to reflect his legislative majority.

That means Montreal — where the CAQ barely has a toehold — is only slated to get of two of the 48 new long-term care residences the government wants to build by the next election.

This, despite the fact that already crowded long-term care homes in Montreal have been among the hardest-hit by the pandemic.

By delaying the bill's passage, the opposition has derailed an attempt to concentrate greater power in the hands of the executive. 

In its original form, Bill 61 would have erased the line between norm and exception. The opposition successfully made an argument that in these extraordinary times, the normal rules still count for something.


Jonathan Montpetit is a Senior Investigative Journalist with CBC News, where he covers social movements and democracy. You can send him tips at

Add some “good” to your morning and evening.

A variety of newsletters you'll love, delivered straight to you.

Sign up now


To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to CBC/Radio-Canada's online communities (except in children and youth-oriented communities). Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted.

By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses. Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.

Become a CBC Member

Join the conversation  Create account

Already have an account?