This week marks the 25th anniversary of the ice storm. One of the worst natural disasters in Quebec history. Yesterday I returned to the dramatic circumstances of an unprecedented storm that would cover entire regions, including the metropolis, with ice over the course of the days.
Let’s now look at one of its most intriguing aspects: crisis management from the perspective of political communication. In January 1998, as the storm began, Prime Minister Lucien Bouchard realized the situation was serious.
The nightmare promises to be tough. For days and many weeks, millions of Quebecers will be without electricity or heating. So we must act. Fast.
In disaster areas, Hydro-Québec deploys its linemen teams. The authorities buy generators, secure hospitals and sewage treatment plants, call in the army, etc.
Given the scale of the crisis, there is also an urgent need to inform the population in order to reassure and mobilize them at the same time. This is where political communication, the sinews of war, come into play.
Thus are born the daily press conferences, led by a trio of shockers: Lucien Bouchard, André Caillé, chief of Hydro-Québec, and the yet more discreet Minister of Public Safety, Pierre Bélanger.
Her key message to Quebecers is that they are not left alone. The PM is also admonishing those who have electricity to accommodate those who don’t. His call for solidarity is followed religiously.
The Five Pillars
Lucien Bouchard then shows that he can master what I would list as the five pillars of effective political communication when people’s health and safety are at risk.
1) The continued presence of strong and compassionate political leadership. 2) Show that concrete action is being taken. 3) Build a relationship of trust with the citizens so that they respect the instructions and also help each other. 4) Make sure the data is correct, even if not everything is said. 5) Proactive media, willing to share widely the information provided by the authorities.
You will have noticed that the same recipe has since become a school. Since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, the trio of François Legault, Danielle McCann and Horacio Arruda have again held daily press conferences.
In full confinement, “1 p.m. Mass” becomes a mandatory gathering. However, that is where the similarities between the two crises end in terms of communication.
Under a global pandemic, the crisis will last much longer. In Quebec there will be thousands of people who died in inhumane conditions. The already broken healthcare network will implode.
Global unpreparedness
However, the trio’s “reassuring” information in a press conference, including on the personal protective equipment of the network employees, will be contradicted by the far less rosy reality on the ground.
Over time, the “1 p.m. Mass” will eventually wear out. The side “spectacle” and too stuck to the politics of Dr. Arruda will turn against him. Health Secretary Danielle McCann, who is considered off the field, will be replaced by Christian Dubé.
Another difference: This fall, Radio-Canada’s Thomas Gerbet reported on the major influence of private firm McKinsey in managing the pandemic, including political communications.
In Quebec, as in other states, the powerful international consulting firm worked discreetly but actively behind the scenes of power.
Bottom Line: Far beyond communication, these two crises share a worrying unpreparedness in front of authorities at every level – politics, public safety, public health, etc.
In the face of the pandemic, the lack of preparation was even planetary. And this despite many experts who have been sounding the alarm about the danger of a possible deadly pandemic for years.
Will the decision makers of this world, present and future, finally have learned the right lessons before the next big crisis? Very clever fortune teller…
