(en) Irish Anarchist Review no 8 - Interview with an organiser from the Quebec 2012 mass student strike & movement.

Having recently completed a seven stop all Ireland speaking tour, Vanessa Gauthier Vela 
answers some questions on the nature of the 2012 Quebec student uprising. This interview 
is a longer version of the one that appeared in the print version of Irish Anarchist 
Review 8. Audio from Vanessa's talks in Ireland will also be available soon. ---- 1. Can 
you briefly summarise the struggle of 2012 for our readers? ---- In March 2011, the 
Liberal government of Quebec announced an increase in tuition fees of $ 1,625 over a 
period of 5 years starting in the fall of 2012. Ultimately, this increase would have 
nearly doubled tuition fees. At that time, the radical part of the student movement, 
organized under a national student union called ASSE, was already mobilizing to trigger, 
in the winter of 2012, a major campaign of general strike in order to resist the tuition hike.

The unlimited general strike officially started on February 13, 2012 when the first 
student unions voted the strike in their local general assembly. At the peak, we reached 
more than 300,000 students on strike, that is to say, three-quarters of all students in 
Quebec. By ?unlimited general strike? Quebec student's movement meant a complete cessation 
of educational activities until the general assemblies would decide otherwise. No student 
who was part of a student union on strike had any classes to go attend. This not only put 
a great deal of pressure on the government, it also meant more free time for students to 
participate in actions and rallies.

Actions were multiple and included flash mob as civil disobedience. There was an 
escalation in the range of tactics used. As the strike got longer, the actions turned to 
be more radical and the people willing to take higher risks. At the same time were formed 
autonomous initiatives which helped to the organization of the strike. The food-committee 
is a good example; it was organized by students and was completely autonomous of national 
structure or local unions. Thanks to the people who got involved there we always had 
enough to feed there the strikers even during dangerous or long actions.

The plan was supposed to be simple: keep the pressure on the government first of all by 
keeping universities and colleges on strike empty and next by doing actions of disruption 
and demonstrations everywhere else. This had to be accomplished while resisting police 
repression. If we could hold on long enough, we knew that the government would be willing 
to negotiate. At least, that?s what previous general strikes in the history of Quebec 
student movement had shown.

We had not anticipated the importance of injunctions in the process of judiciary 
repression. A number of students against the strike, including some associated with the 
Liberal Party, went to court to force school administrators to do everything in their 
power to allow them to attend their classes. Some administrators interpreted these 
injunctions as a reason to call the police on campuses, fuelling a moment of violent 
clashes between strikers and police.

When negotiations were finally contemplated, the offer made by the government was 
perceived as an insult by the student movement. A spontaneous evening rally ensued, 
followed by demonstrations every evening for more than three months.

There were attempts to establish ties with other social struggles. The student movement 
enthusiastically joined the resistance of First Nations and environmental groups against 
the Plan Nord, a governmental plan to exploit the natural resources of the North, and in 
the context of Earth Day's rally. Connections have also been attempted with worker?s 
organizations by participating in their actions and inviting them to ours. However, even 
if workers unions have shown signs of solidarity by making donations or publicizing our 
actions, this connection was more difficult.

At the end of April, further negotiations with the government were announced, but they 
failed once again. The student unions on strike rejected the offer, and from there, some 
of them started to vote for an indeterminate strike "until the withdrawal of the hike."

In May, realizing that its intransigence and violence did not succeed in breaking the 
students, the government voted a special law, Bill 78. Spontaneous demos became illegal 
and organizations or individuals who participated or organized were subject to heavy 
fines. Also, the semester was suspended until the end of the summer, making strike votes 
non- effective since there were no classes anyway. Suddenly, we were strikers on lock out.

This law created a legitimacy problem for the government. Even people against the student 
strike wanted to denounce the anti-democratic law. It created what we called ?les manifs 
de casseroles? or ?pots and pans protests?. People from different neighbourhoods left 
their homes at 8PM and joined in the streets to protest loudly. The Metropolitan area and 
several towns saw joyful chaotic demos happening every evening. One of the positive 
long-lasting outcomes of the strike which emerged at that time was the autonomous 
neighbourhoods assemblies. They started with neighbours protesting with pots and pans and 
became spaces for people in the same neighbourhoods to organize themselves around 
political issues.

Meanwhile, the official suspension of the semester imposed a break in the struggle. Long 
months of constant struggle and repression were starting to fall heavily on people. With 
summer months, large portions of students had to start thinking about summer jobs. The 
strike was crumbling.

In August, the Liberal government called an election. From that moment on, the student 
movement broke up. On one side, students wanted to put energy into the election of a new 
government to address the issue of the tuition hike. On the other side, some believe that 
the strike should go on regardless of the campaign in order to put pressure on the new 
government whatever the outcome of the election. At the end of summer, the strike votes 
were not passing anymore in general assemblies. Some local unions resisted until the 
elections, but it was obviously the end of the unlimited general strike of 2012.

On September 19th, the new government, formed by the Parti Qu?becois, officially abolished 
the tuition hike by decree and repealed the Bill 78. Nevertheless, at the end of the 
strike, many of us stayed with a bitter taste in mouth. Not only because the electoral 
game made us lose control of our own movement, but also because the new government imposed 
on us an increase of 3 % every year. This last increase has not limitation in the time.

2. In the beginning, how did the student movement engage with the rest of the student 
population on the fee increase issue and get them to take action when the issue first 
arose? How did the student movement get other students to become aware of the issues and 
radicalise them?

The plan had already proved itself in past strikes. It had to mobilize as many people as 
possible on the topic of unlimited general strike not only with a massive information 
campaign, but also by involving students in decision-making about the struggle. At the 
same time, and as early as 2010, we had to engage the movement in an escalation of tactics 
that should bring, in winter 2012, the unlimited general strike as the only possible 
action against the hike.

"In 2010 and 2011, we focused on smaller-scale protests, training camps and other events 
with the objective of involving as many students as possible in their student union and in 
the committees formed around ASSE. By the end of 2011, not only were ASSE?s commitees 
packed, but cores of activists had gathered around many student unions. In September 2011, 
we launched a massive information campaign on campuses under the slogan ?Stop the hike?4. 
All kinds of material was put out during that period: flyers, leaflets, posters, a 
website, video clips, research papers, etc. The goal was to get as much of this material 
into the hands of students as possible and get them thinking and talking about the 
upcoming tuition hike." (studentstrike.net)

The keywords were information and participation. In fact, the more people are actively 
involved in decision making and in the development of the action plan, the more they feel 
responsible and are ready to be radicalized. Thus, increasing the number of people 
mobilized and ready to act is far more important than the multiplication of conferences 
and articles on the subject, even if one does not go without the other.

3. Was there already a student movement in the Universities? Or was it born when the 
tuition fees were increased?

Quebec has a long tradition of student activism dating from the 60s and the structure of 
student organizations are recognized by law since the 80s. Before the strike of 2012 
Quebec experienced major student strikes in 1968, 1974, 1986, 1990 and 2005.

4. What does an increase in student debt mean for ordinary students?

For a student who already has to work to study, an increase of his/her debt of study means 
first of all paying more interests to banks. It can cause financial difficulties at the 
end of the studies and delay some life projects as starting a family. It can also bring 
some students to neglect their studies or dropping out even without having obtained their 
degree. Also, for the marginalized groups as women or people of colour it also means to 
take longer to pay off their debts that a white man with the same degree.

5. Education can become an issue for everyone in society. How did activists engage with 
and mobilise other groups in society to involve them in the student struggle? Did students 
practice solidarity with these other groups?

At the 2012 strike we can make the criticism, along with the congratulations, to having 
the effect of uniting most of the left activists. From the moment the student movement was 
organized and positioned itself as an active actor in a social crisis of great scale, and 
that the government continued to refuse to negotiate with it, all social movements 
mobilized themselves in solidarity, and individuals who composed them were part of them

A lot of different people were involved in the strike others as being part of an organized 
group. We have seen unionists, anarchists, communists, feminists, anticolonialists, 
members of community groups and other groups being part of the movement and participate at 
actions and demos organized by students.

The strike was a space where a majority of activists channeled their energy towards the 
student movement. It helped to keep the strike very lively, but unfortunately it also led 
to the monopolization by the student movement, and sometimes in spite of itself, of all 
other issues, such as anti-colonial struggles and feminist struggles. But this space also 
helped building solidarities between groups. And if sometimes it was easy to go through 
the experiences of these to create these ties it was much more difficult to forge 
solidarity with structurally rigid groups such as unions workers.

6. Can you briefly describe CLASSE and its structure? How did the different groups 
communicate with each other effectively?

The CLASSE was a coalition of local student unions at the time of 2012 strike. It existed 
because the ASS?, one of three national student union, opened its structures to make 
possible for the local unions that weren't members of ASS? to be part of a national 
organization for the time of the strike. The ASS? is recognized as the most radical 
association. It promotes free education and acts on behalf of its values of direct 
democracy and syndicalism. It does not hesitate to take a stand on issues that go beyond 
education and encourages participation in decision making. It aims to be democratic and 
transparent.

The legitimacy and the accountability of the structure pass through the local general 
assemblies. In local general assemblies every member can make proposals and every member 
has a vote. Proposals can have local or national effects. They could be about principles, 
actions or in support with other struggles. When the objective of the proposal is to have 
a national effect, the delegation of the union that voted it in first place has to bring 
it to the congress as it could be discussed with all the other delegation members of the 
national structure.

The congress is the tool that allows the communication and decision-making at a national 
level. Usually the ASS? makes 2 congresses every year but for the needs of the strike it 
had to do organize congress every week. Delegates are not representatives of theirs 
union?s membership, neither were they sent in to express their personal views. The 
delegate's role is to bring up and defend the positions of their union?s own general 
assembly. As a result, only motions which have the support of a majority of local general 
assemblies can pass.

A congress is a perfect time not only to inform other unions on what's happening in ours, 
but the discussions that happen there are also useful to the radicalization and 
politicization of unions.

7. What was the specific importance of feminist organising in preparation for the struggle?

Minimal. Feminist made a place for themselves during the strike but they were not invited 
as feminists in the preparation of the strike. In fact, there were so many conflicts 
between the national team and the feminists in the ASS? that the whole women?s committee 
resigned a little before the strike.

8. Were there any issues around sexism or racism to deal with during the struggle?

Yes. First of all the dynamics between the former ?comit?-femmes? (women-committee) of the 
ASS? and the national team at the beginning of the strike did set the tone for the 
feminists who found that throughout the strike women?s issues were put at the bottom of 
the list. There was a paradoxical relation of cooperation and criticism between the 
feminists on strike and the rest of student movement. Feminists organized themselves in 
autonomous ways to explain why the hike was sexist. They produced papers, leaflets, and 
workshops on the topic of women and education, but also on the place of the women in the 
strike. Indeed, it did not take time to realize that the dynamics of the strike produced 
the same old reflexes as in any sphere of life. Men are usually more visible and make more 
valued tasks, whereas the women usually do invisible and little valued tasks. Throughout 
the strike, the feminists criticized these paternalistic reflexes in the movement by 
imposing critics as much as proposing solutions.

Throughout the strike, the feminists criticized these paternalistic reflexes in the 
movement and proposed many solutions to those issues.

The antiracism and the anticolonialism had much less space. In the CLASSE congresses it 
was difficult to bring anticolonialist proposals or proposals about foreign students. It 
demonstrated that the majority of the student population in Quebec are white and 
French-speaking. Issues affecting people of color as well as english speakers were pushed 
aside

9. Were there any tensions within CLASSE or the student movement?

The students' protest movement of 2012, as any punctual political alliance, was full of 
tensions between various groups or tendencies. A lot of people or groups would never have 
agreed to collaborate together in another situation. For example there is an historic 
distance and distrust between ASS? and two other national federations (FEUQ, FECQ). Some 
local union members of ASS? even have mandates of distrust or destruction of these 
federations.

The strike also raised the tension between people who understood their struggle as a fight 
against the government and the others who thought about it like an opportunity to convince 
?the public opinion" with pacific ways. Strangely, those who wanted to convince the public 
opinion always were the quickest to strike violently people who were smashing or tagging 
buildings and windows.

The space of the strike was full of tensions. Whether it was between moderates and 
radicals, between university students and college students, or between the metropolitan 
region and more distant regions, people were not always affected by the same issues and 
did not see the modalities of the alliance in the same way.

10. What tactics did the State, the media and the police use to try and defeat the 
students? Were any of their tactics particularly successful?

First of all, there was a constant struggle between the students' protest movement and the 
State, the bourgeois media, and the police, about the question of legitimacy. At the very 
beginning, the State tried to minimize our strike by using the word boycott and with the 
complicity of bourgeois media it tried to isolate completely the movement. They created a 
separation between bad-students-who-don?t-even-pay-taxes and 
good-citizens-who-pay-taxes-and-don?t-block-streets. The bourgeois media were firm 
opponents by the way they always minimized our actions and our rallies. On the other hand, 
pretexting to present both sides, every time they could interview a student against the 
strike they always put him under the spot and present him as a victim.
At some point bourgeois media became police informers. It was impossible to be part of the 
strike actions without our image was being taken by their cameras. Some students had the 
bad surprise to see their names in newspapers beside an action of civil disobedience where 
they weren?t even there. Of course, medias never apologize themselves for this kind of 
mistakes and were always complaining about us making their job of ?inform the public? harder.

The physical brutality of the State against the students' movement and the judicial 
repression are certainly the tactics which had the most impacts on the students. While 
students were hit, lost eyes, got broken bones, were searched without mandate and 
imprisoned without being under arrest, the government, the bourgeois media, and the 
police, presented this violence as being the same thing as broken windows and graffiti. 
The sad thing is that a big part of the public opinion has never made the difference.

The injunctions were also difficult. These injunctions forced the direction of 
establishments to make everything in their power to allow classes to be given to those 
requesting the injunctions. It took all the courage of the students to block their 
institutions against the police which had been called to break their lines.

11. Has the struggle left a lasting impression on social movements in Quebec?

The strike of 2012 is the most impressive demonstration that a social movement left in 
Quebec since several years. In spite of a finale which leaves a bitter taste to several, 
it is undeniable that gains were made for the continuation of the socials movements.

First of all it shown that a punctual alliance on precise subjects could be large-scale, 
even when the various actors never usually work together. Activists' networks were 
established, spread, or solidified. There was a transmission of knowledge as regards the 
resistance at the repression of the State, and people generally became more radical. In 
the same way, groups decided to get organized in solidarity with people who had to wipe 
economic consequences of a long strike by food aid. For several groups, which take place 
in the range of services to the population, that was a moment of extreme politicization of 
which it is difficult to move back from. This politicization created new ties. One of the 
gains of the strike are the autonomous assemblies of districts that bring together 
neighbours who want to get organized politically and that did not exist before the strike.

It is also interesting to notice that in the general population a certain opening was made 
on principles which were little or not known before. For example, that at the end of the 
strike the principle of direct democracy is known by the public and that the bourgeois 
media speak about it are definitively gains. Of course the general population did not 
adopt these principles, but at least they were known, and we had given the proof that it 
was possible to work direct democracy in large-scale.??

WORDS: Brian Fagan interviewing Vanessa Gauthier Vela