Quebec’s small man syndrome

By Jocelyn Hunt

A recent article published in Maclean’s magazine, “Quebec: the most corrupt province” by Martin Patriquin, has received a significant amount of negative response from Quebecers and their Premier, Jean Charest. The article covers decades of petty and grand corruption at municipal and provincial levels. All negative news begets reaction, yet was it really necessary for Charest to write a response to the editor of Maclean’s and demand an apology to Quebecers? Why yes, it was, because he is the premier of a province with chronic short man syndrome.

Throughout Quebec’s long (by Canadian standards) history, the people and their government have been known to jump up with fists raised to defend the Francophone province. Short man syndrome is an unofficial but alleged syndrome in which individuals perceive an inferiority and overcompensate because of it. With only 23.2 per cent of the Canadian population, Quebec is definitely the short man in the linguistic line up of our bilingual country.

Does Quebec have the right to defend itself against unfair or misleading articles? Of course. Yet the lack of legitimate claims against Patriquin’s article by Charest and many of the online comments posted by Quebecers demonstrate the outrage is just another example of Quebec’s overcompensation.

Charest begins by disputing the integrity of the article because serious journalism “is supported by facts and evidence.” Apparently Patriquin quoting figures and events from Transport Canada, Auditor General Sheila Fraser, Radio-Canada and reports produced by Quebec Solidaire are not sufficient evidence to demonstrate corruption. Neither is recalling widely-known news such as the use of Hell’s Angels muscle in Montreal to intimidate construction companies to price fix, the sponsorship scandal or the current inquiry over the appointment of judges in Quebec. Although Patriquin does use examples spanning almost five decades, does this not further prove that Quebec itself is prone to corruption, and not just the current government?

Many online comments, en Français, concluded that the Maclean’s article was yet another opportunity to bash Quebec because it lacked any comparison to Anglo provinces. The article does, however, mention corruption cases in British Columbia, Ontario and Saskatchewan, but explains that the frequency and duration of Quebec’s cases are what make it unique.

Furthermore, it is evident that Patriquin is likely Maclean’s journalist on Quebec issues considering that half of his articles published by Maclean’s since July 1, 2010 were related to Quebec. Sometimes an article is just an article and is not written with malice.

Premier Charest reminds us that “Quebecers have always understood that their government and institutions would play an important role.” Considering that Quebec is one of the, if not the most left-of-centre governments in North America, this is self-evident. Yet most people would agree ‘government involvement’ is not synonymous with ‘government favours.’ Patriquin did not attack any of Quebec’s governments on policy decisions, he merely points out Quebec’s rising reliance on Canada. Perhaps, just for argument’s sake, this reliance would be substantially less if the corruption that Patriquin writes about was not present.

Many legitimate arguments could be made against Patriquin’s article, yet currently all fail miserably because they lack any validity or strength. Unfortunately, this is an ongoing theme. Why? Because Quebec continues to have its fists raised to perceived threats as the short man of Canada.