Nycole Turmel, the Bloc, and the Politics of National Unity

5 Comments
Join the Conversation
Nycole Turmel -  Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS
Nycole Turmel - Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS
By chastising Nycole Turmel, we risk alienating Quebec nationalists at a time when they have just flocked to a federalist party in record numbers.

She was the first woman to be elected President of Public Service Alliance of Canada, the former Vice President of the Canadian Employment and Immigration Union, served as a member of the Executive Committee for the Canadian Labour Congress, served as Vice President of the Ombudsman's office of the City of Gatineau, is the former Treasurer of the Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women, and represented workers on the Management Committee of Financial Assets of the QFL Solidarity Fund.

Politically, she has been a member of the New Democratic Party of Canada since 1991, served as Associate President of the party, and moderated the party’s leadership process in 2003. As remarkable of a life as that may sound, this woman also co-Chaired the Social Democratic Forum on Canada’s Future that “brought together progressive Canadians from all parts of the country” with a clear federalist mandate and vision. This is the life of Nycole Turmel, interim leader of the NDP.

However, there’s a catch. Nycole Turmel was also a member of the Bloc from 2006 to 2010 and a member of the Quebec Solidaire, a leftist political party with separatist roots.

Predictably, politicians and the media in English-speaking Canada are up in arms over her brief political affiliation with the separatist movement in Quebec. The attack seems to be led by the Liberals – an all but extinct political breed in Quebec – but even the Prime Minister has expressed his ‘disappointment’.

However, the Grits and the Tories should be very cautious in their attempts to smear Nycole Turmel’s character. Underneath the political posturing lies the unpredictable and often unstable underbelly of Canadian regional politics and there is much more at stake than simply scoring a few cheap political points – the Liberals are playing politics with national unity.

What many people outside of Quebec don't realize is that until the NDP breakthrough in the last election, there wasn’t a viable left-leaning, federalist political party in Quebec and separatists have traditionally dominated leftist politics in the province. Quebecers know that being a member of a separatist party is hardly evidence that you are a separatist.

Before May 2nd, many Quebecers who had voted for the Bloc or held membership in the party were Quebec nationalists, not separatists. That is an important distinction to make and is often lost on English-speaking Canadians who dismiss any sympathy for the Bloc as anti-Canadian.

If you were living in Quebec before the NDP breakthrough on May 2nd and you considered yourself a progressive it is quite likely that you held a party membership of or voted for a separatist party at some point in your life. You see, to Quebecers, sovereignty is a legitimate political position and many left-leaning Quebec nationalists saw the Bloc as a viable alternative that could speak for Quebec in Ottawa, without fully endorsing separation.

This is where I believe the Liberals – and Harper, who I will touch on later - have gotten themselves in trouble. While this issue may get headlines in English-speaking Canada and score some cheap, short term political points the potential fallout from this could be dangerous for Canada’s national unity.

If the Liberals are successful in their bid to make all things vaguely relatable to the Bloc off limits for federalist parties, they could run the risk of a serious long-term backlash and this stunt could be the much needed wind missing from the deflated sails of Quebec sovereignists.

Ask yourself – how many former members of the Bloc identify with Nycole Turmel? By attacking her credibility as a legitimate interim leader of the NDP, because of her “ties” to the Bloc, the Liberals risk indirectly attacking regular, every day Quebecers. This would confirm the deep rooted suspicion held by many Quebecers that English-speaking Canada is arrogant and intolerant of Quebec’s political culture.

I suspect separatists will be the first to point out to sympathetic Quebec nationalists that this political posturing is evidence that Canada’s English-speaking mainstream will never understand Quebec and the political establishment will never tolerate any kind of Quebec nationalism at any level. This is not good for national unity regardless of your feelings on Quebec nationalism.

Harper also runs the risk of allowing some political skeletons to escape from his closet. Many will remember the meteoric rise and fall of Quebec’s ADQ and the special relationship the party had with the federal Conservative Party. The right wing party, led by Mario Dumont, became Quebec’s Official Opposition in 2007 only to lose official party status in the following election.

What makes Harper’s attacks on Nycole Turmel potential political dynamite for him and his party is the fact that he supported Dumont’s vision of Quebec “autonomy”. Couple that with Dumont’s support for the “Yes” side in the last referendum and you can see how chastising a woman who voted "No" in the last referendum while tacitly supporting a man who voted "Yes" could prove difficult for the Prime Minister to explain.

Mario Dumont’s plan for Quebec autonomy would have given Quebec control over twenty-two specific areas of governance and was crafted to appeal largely to the Quebec nationalist vote – the same vote that is also courted by separatist parties and the same constituency that sent fifty-eight NDP MPs to Ottawa.

If Harper isn’t careful, he risks exposing his former alliances with staunch Quebec nationalists and former separatists – a risk that could end up further alienating the shrinking number of Quebecers who still support the Conservative Party in the province.

At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter whether or not Nycole Turmel has led a career serving in many leadership positions that took on a decidedly federalist tone or that she refused Gilles Duceppe’s request to run for the Bloc or that she has stated that she voted “No” in both Quebec referendums. Or the fact that any self-respecting separatist would never consider running for a federalist party, let alone take on the position of interim leader of said party. No, this is Canadian politics and reason and rationality rarely win the day.

However, I hope the Liberals, who are playing politics with national unity, understand that the only way to defeat separatism is to co-opt it. Quebec's right to self determination is something I've always supported and we need to engage Quebec nationalists if we want to prevent the Quebec sovereignty movement from taking the nationalist vote. If we chastise Nycole Turmel, we risk alienating other Quebec nationalists at a time when they have just flocked to a federalist party and rejected separatism in record numbers.

Sources:

Nycole Turmel’s Official Website

Social Democratic Forum on Canada’s Future

The Globe and Mail

The Toronto Star

The Ottawa Citizen

CBC News

National Post

Canada.com

Jesse Cullen, Marko Ivancicevic

Jesse Cullen - Social justice, progressive politics, and provocative writing.

rss
Advertisement
Leave a comment

NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.
Submit
What is 10+6?

Comments

Aug 4, 2011 11:41 AM
Guest :
Once a Commie, always a Commie.
Aug 4, 2011 6:25 PM
Guest :
So, you don't think that Canadians have the right to question whether the current leader of the NDP is a separatist based on her association with 2 separatist organizations? You don't think the views of the Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition on Quebec independence should be questioned because she has done a lot of stuff?

Michael Ignatieff was at least as qualified and accomplished, yet that didn't stop Jack Layton and the NDP from attacking his credibility.

I'm sorry, but your article is ridiculous. To be in politics is to be questioned. If Madame Turmel does not want to be held accountable for her views, perhaps she should find another line of work.
Aug 4, 2011 8:25 PM
Jesse Cullen :
"So, you don't think that Canadians have the right to question whether the current leader of the NDP is a separatist based on her association with 2 separatist organizations?"

No, that's not what I wrote and if you could point to a passage in the article where I said "Canadians don't have the right to question..." I'd appreciate it. What I did say that English-speaking media and politicians aften mistakenly (or maybe intentionally) lump any affiliation with the Bloc as separatist when, in fact, many progressive Quebecers have supported a separatist party at some point in their life even without endorsing separation. I've often speculated that if I had lived in Quebec before the NDP breakthrough on May 2nd, I would have probably supported the Bloc for because of their social democratic roots.

"You don't think the views of the Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition on Quebec independence should be questioned because she has done a lot of stuff? Michael Ignatieff was at least as qualified and accomplished, yet that didn't stop Jack Layton and the NDP from attacking his credibility"

Well, first of all you should be more upset that we are still technically governed by a Royal Family in the 21st Century. Secondly, her views have been clarified as she has said she voted "No" in the two referendums and refused to run for the Bloc and chose to run for a federalist party instead. Shouldn't we be celebrating the fact that a strong, progressive, proud Quebec woman has chosen to promote federalism?

Also, the "stuff" she did over her accomplished career all took a very decidedly federalist tone. That's what makes it relevant. I also hope this isn't sour grapes over Ignatieff's less than inspiring campaign and dismal showing in Quebec. If you'll remember, it was Harper's Conservatives that called into question his dedication to Canada, not the NDP. Layton called into question is attendance record in the House of Commons. If you can point to me when the NDP questioned Ignatieff's patriotism, I'd also appreciate that.

"If Madame Turmel does not want to be held accountable for her views, perhaps she should find another line of work."

What views are you referring to? You can't just make stuff up. She has never - in her entire career - supported the separation of Quebec from Canada and if you could give me a link to a quote from her that says otherwise I'll immediately take down my article and formerly clal for her resignation.

However, I do recommend that you read "The Social Democratic Forum on Canada's Future" that she co-Chaired which outlines a path forward for federalist social democrats from across the country. See, there's a reason the Liberals are known as "Fib-erals" and it's because when they can't find any shred of evidence to back up their claim, they just start making stuff up.
Aug 5, 2011 11:28 AM
Guest :
"Once a Commie, always a Commie."

Once a douchebag, always a douchebag.
Aug 9, 2011 4:26 PM
Guest :
... great promotion ... now let's talk about the current membership with Quebec Solidaire ... their philosophy ... their spokesman ... Amir Khadir ... the radical left wing of the NDP ... the conference ... etc
5 Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement