In a recent column (“ Liberals are attempting a high-wire act with talk of Quebec constitution, ” Nov. 15), Robert Libman argued that the idea of a Quebec constitution, adopted at the Quebec Liberal Party’s convention on Nov. 9 , is a bad one in part because it would force judges “to interpret minority rights differently by giving disproportionate weight to constitutional rights of the majority.” He also wrote that other issues — Quebec’s $11-billion deficit , soaring prices, a housing crisis, etc. — are in need of urgent attention. I agree that a constitution for Quebec is not the priority for many Quebecers. This is why in the National Assembly, Liberal MNAs unceasingly question the Legault government’s mismanagement of public services, the budget and the economy. This is also why the party’s policy committee worked for months on a new economic plan, focused on innovation and productivity — a plan that was adopted last spring at the party’s general council in Bromont . Our members are working hard to find solutions to the crisis in access to public services. And at this month’s convention in Lévis, we voted on several proposals to improve the province’s education system. The Quebec Liberal Party is indeed laser-focused on Quebecers’ concrete problems. That said, issues related to language, religion, immigration and Quebecers’ fundamental rights will always be preoccupations in this province. No political party can ignore them. The purpose of the constitution we are proposing is to unite Quebecers of all languages and backgrounds around a set of common values and principles. Canada’s Constitution already allows for provincial constitutions; therefore, a Quebec constitution would not be a rival to the Canadian one. Our model would enshrine both the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Charter of the French Language (after taking out unacceptable clauses introduced by Bill 96 ). The charter of rights and freedoms would be modified to limit the use of the notwithstanding clause. And the Quebec constitution would enshrine the rights of English-speaking Quebecers to services in English and to manage their own institutions — those already founded and those they will create in the future. Libman states that iron-clad protections already exist in the Canadian Constitution and the Quebec health services act. Maybe. But never in Quebec’s history have those rights been formally asserted by provincial law, which would prevent, for instance, the government of Quebec from issuing a directive such as the infamous one regarding language in health-care settings published last summer by the Health Ministry , or from attempting to get rid of English school boards . According to Libman, the resolution on a Quebec constitution was “pushed through” over concerns raised by “several anglophones.” In fact, the resolution was supported by both francophone and anglophone members. Former MP and former Quebec Community Groups Network president Marlene Jennings sent a note to the convention expressing her support for the idea of a Quebec constitution, highlighting that “the rights of the English-speaking minority would be enshrined for the first time” and that “this is a unifying project that could rally many Quebecers.” A few members, francophones and anglophones, were opposed to the idea, and we held a thorough debate. The resolution was not “pushed through,” but democratically adopted by an overwhelming majority of the 700 Liberals present. As Libman rightly points out, in Quebec, the balance between the collective rights of the French-language majority and individual and minority rights is not easy to find. Most of the province’s parties do not even attempt to discover that equilibrium. The Quebec Liberal Party seeks to find the right balance, because we are convinced that protecting French as our common language is possible without infringing on individual and minority rights. It appears to me that such an approach deserves praise rather than scorn. The economy and the poor state of Quebec’s public services remain at the forefront of Liberals’ preoccupations. But that doesn’t mean other issues should be ignored. If we are to offer Quebecers a serious alternative to the current government in the 2026 election, we need to be active on all fronts. That is our goal. That is our plan. André Pratte is the chair of the Quebec Liberal Party’s national policy committee. Related Robert Libman: Liberals are attempting a high-wire act with talk of Quebec constitution Liberals would repeal Bill 96, entrench anglo rights in new Quebec constitution Opinion: A Quebec constitution would unite us, not divide us