Businessman Charles Milliard is once again throwing his name in the hat to be the next leader of the Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ). Milliard came in second to Pablo Rodriguez in the previous leadership race. The latter stepped down in December after being mired in controversy. Milliard is the first and only person to enter the race so far. He and CJAD 800’s Aaron Rand discussed how the next leader can have the PLQ bounce back in time for the November election. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. See the full interview below. Q. Is this going to be an actual race, or is this going to be a coronation? You’re the only one who’s officially announced their intention to run. Are you expecting others? A. We’ll see what happens. We don’t choose our opponents, we fight them. So we’ll see what happens. I wanted to make sure that people know that I want the job. I’ve been thinking about it very thoroughly in during the holiday seasons. I know the party had a rough December, obviously. But you know what? I’m more convinced than at any point in the first race that we need a new political offer in Quebec, and I think the Liberal Party has a huge role to play in that. The renewal that I was talking to you about a year ago is more than ever needed. So here I am. Q. What do people need to know about you? People often cite the fact that you don’t have a political background. A. I think it’s positive. And you cannot expect someone to represent renewal and having been an MNA for 20 years. That being said, I come with very interesting professional experience. I’m 46 years old. I come from Levy, across the river from Quebec City. I’m a pharmacist. I worked for 14 years for Uniprix, a chain of pharmacies well known in Quebec. I used to manage the Federation of chambers of commerce of Quebec. I quit that job to run for the leadership campaign, and then I got hired by Bishops University for the last fall semester where I taught entrepreneurship, product development, strategy, and innovation. I gave it a little thought, and I’m running again and but this time, the results will be different. Q. After what happened with Pablo Rodriguez, are you worried people will be reluctant to trust you? A. I’m a man that that is loyal. I’ve been a member of the Liberal Party of Quebec since 1998, more or less. So the week after I lost the leadership, I was in Victoriaville for the byelection with Pablo doing interviews. I think people believe that I am a true liberal and I’m true to myself, I know what I’m going to be proposing to members and Quebecers, but I’ll let them decide. Q. What do you think you can change or bring to the table that has not been brought up? A. Just talking about bread and butter issues and challenges that actually matter to Quebecers will be a huge change from from what we see right now. A little bit less about immigration, identity and sovereignty, and more about healthcare, education, culture, agriculture, mining, forestry, transportation. Those are the issues Quebecers want to hear about. When I’m going to a party in my family or at the grocery stores, people don’t talk to me about the sovereignty of Quebec. They talk to me about the cost of living, about health care and so on. So in 2025 we’ve been talking way too much about the dangerous Canada, dangerous unions, the dangerous doctors. We need more kindness in the political field in Quebec. I know politics is not social dancing, but I think more kindness will be interesting, and more positivism. That’s I want to bring. Q. It does not look like the Coalition Avenir Québec will be your main concern. The Parti Québécois, according to recent polls, stand to win this next election, even for voters who don’t want a referendum. What do you do to counter that? A. I actually respect the PQ position. I think the PQ project is clearer than the CAQ project, which I don’t know what it is, to be honest. I think it goes with the flow, but the flow is running out of water right now. That being said, I’m a member of the Liberal Party of Quebec. I am a nationalist, I am a regionalist, and I am also a Federalist. I want to succeed to great former premiers and leaders like Robert Bourassa. He had that useful tension with Ottawa, and out of tension, we can create opportunity. But the difference between the CAQ and the PLQ that I want to lead is that I want Canada to work. That doesn’t mean we’re not going to have any negotiation and arguments, but in the end, in a negotiation. When you want this to work, it changes the flow of discussion. The only true party that really wants Canada to work with a strong Quebec, that’s us, and that’s the party I want to lead. Q. What do you do think of Bill 96 and Bill 21? A. I’m obviously in favour of protecting French. I think French is a precious gem in Quebec. I’m for the secularity of Quebec, but I don’t agree with the definition of protection of French and secularity that the CAQ is proposing. So we’re going to have to change definitions in the coming months. I am a nationalist, so I believe in a strong Quebec, I believe in the in the power of the French language. But we don’t have to do that at the expense of the English speaking communities and of all the different cultural communities or immigrants. I am tired of that divisive discussion over immigration. This is the end of that chapter, hopefully, in the next coming months. Q. You’re suggesting you’re against protecting the French language by punishing the English language and taking something away. What would change? A. There’s a lot of good things in Bill 96. One of the problems is the red tape. It is not true to say that Bill 96 is actually increasing the protection of French, especially for SMEs. This is a thin line. The problem is that the CAQ has succeeded in telling people, if you if you are against Bill 96 you are against French, that’s enough. This is not true. Q. There’s an investigation into the PLQ that you’re going to have to contend with. Do you think you have to do distance yourself from the people who are close to Pablo, who are now implicated in this thing or not? A. Politics is all about loyalty and accountability. So if I run this party, I will be accountable for what happens, but I cannot be accountable for something that happened when I was not a leader. But I will take my responsibilities if I’m the leader. I don’t want to distance myself to anybody precisely. I want to propose something new. I was asking members last year to turn the page. The page still needs to be turned, obviously. So we’ll do it.
