The election of a minority government in Quebec will elicit much commentary over the coming weeks. Media analysis, however, should be treated with some scepticism as pundits attempt to narrow the meaning of the recent vote to a single dimension. However, Quebec's plebiscite is so rich in its many facets, like a well cut diamond or a complex tableau, that it would be a mistake to claim that any one meaning could be discerned from the unexpected results of March 26.

Having said that, let us modestly examine some of the conclusions to be drawn from the surprising events that have unfolded before our eyes. The picture that emerges may be closer to reality than most of the current editorial page commentary.

1. The first impression, one that received much attention from commentators on election night, is that Quebec has become almost ungovernable. Among Canada's provinces, Quebec is the province which includes the greatest number of special interest groups, the highest number of trade unions, and the most diverse expectations. In Quebec, the population blames the government for all the ills on the planet and expects government to sort them out regardless of the cost, regardless of the state of public finances. The welfare state, provider of all good things, is not a myth in Quebec, it's perceived as reality. Every government must achieve near perfection, or be subject to relentless attacks in the newspapers, blogs, or on Sunday night's " Tout le monde en parle ". In these circumstances, one wonders why Dumont, Boisclair and Charest fought so hard for the office of Prime Minister.
2. It is clear that Mario Dumont's overnight ascension to Leader of Opposition status can be ascribed to the fact that he was able to personify, better than his opponents, Quebec's ambiguity towards federalism and separatism. Always vague when it came to his deeply held beliefs, apparently riding both the Harper and Parizeau horses simultaneously, Dumont succeeded in attracting to his cause some separatists and some federalists, and he did so without scaring off too many Quebecers.
3. Another view of Mario Dumont ties his rapid rise in the polls to the fact that the population simply had had enough of the energy sapping, endless debate over separation that had been stunting Quebec's growth for years. A significant part of the March 26 message is that the population of Quebec is trying to break free from the rivalry between the separatists and the federalists. The rejection of the PQ and its First Amendment by a large portion of the electorate is an encouraging sign for a group like Uni.ca, as no one can deny any more that in "pure laine" territory a significant segment of the population is tired of the same old tunes about federalism, referenda and independence. The coming months will enable Mario Dumont to enjoy, for the first time, adequate party funding. Chances are that in two years, his opposition party will be stronger and, as a result, better positioned to take power.
4. It is important to note as well that Mario Dumont went so far as trying to fill the void left by the old Union Nationale in the regions. Not unlike Stephen Harper, the ADQ attracts business people, right wingers, opponents of social programs, as well as the people who are least tolerant of immigrants and diversity. . . . A Dumont government appears capable of implementing painful cuts to health insurance, daycare, and the public service, to name only a few. The spectre of Maurice Duplessis and his ultra conservative reign may scare people away and unite Quebec's powerful Left.
5. As for the PQ and its hard line partisans, they will not awake from their nightmare if they continue to call for one referendum after another. Even though it could be painful for the party's old guard, a radical cleansing of their warring factions is overdue. To move forward, the separatist dream will need to turn to moderation and patience for several years to come. The mantra of the hardliners is "go big or go home", but it is increasingly clear that the electorate is responding to this mantra by saying "go home". Can the PQ change direction and leadership? Will André Boisclair cede his place to Gilles Duceppe? Would the latter agree to pick up his marbles and return to Quebec City? Nothing is less certain. And what will Bernard Landry do, he who still bitterly regrets having given up the party's reins?
6. Lastly, the election served as a serious warning to the Liberal Party. The idea of positioning themselves at the centre right has always worked for their party. Unfortunately for the Liberals, in the foreseeable future, this strategy is going to be squeezed very hard: the centre right is also occupied by Mario Dumont's team and there is only so much room in that particular phone booth. As the party in power, it will become increasingly difficult for the QLP to distinguish itself, while at the same time avoiding attacks for each mistake, no matter how small. Certain Liberals are clearly tempted to join the ADQ which is perceived, unlike the Grits, as having a future that is not mortgaged by the past. If that happens, Jean Charest's party may well be discarded at the next election. Hence the importance of competent, solid governance that differentiates the Liberals from the ADQ, without sacrificing creativity and imagination. A green Liberal government might increase their popular support by attracting the 4 per cent of Quebecers who voted for the Green Party of Quebec.

The preceding remains an elusive amalgam of images and ephemeral perceptions. But in it resides the key meaning of the Quebec election, a meaning that each party will try to shape and control in the coming months. As a result, the picture for Canadian unity has taken on new depth and new shadings. One thing is clear: the creative process needed to renew the political landscape of Canada will be very exciting for all the painters jostling at the easel and for all the viewers passing through the gallery.