babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
What's the role of the federal NDP in Quebec if sovereignty remains a hot issue?
March 17, 2014 - 3:22pm
a pretty good discussion saying federal NDP appears sort of agnostic on the federalism/unity issue, one of its advantages in 2011 -- making it a big tent party for both ex-Bloc and ex-Liberal voters
however, in the unfortunate even the sovereignty-referendum issues heat up, NDP is poorly placed to take a stand and retain its new 2011 voters:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/globe-politics-insider/how-...
NDP must take a stand but somehow retain its new 2011 voters, argues Globe writer :
The NDP is sitting on the sidelines of Quebec’s election, but the race could hold the key to their fortunes. If Quebec politics becomes polarized around the prospect of another referendum on sovereignty, the New Democrats will be threatened.
After almost three years as the Biggest Federal Party in Quebec, the NDP still has relatively weak roots. And when it comes to the old battles between separatists and federalists, it’s a pale presence. That’s why the NDP’s Quebec breakthrough will be in deeper danger if Pauline Marois’s Parti Québécois wins a majority government.
As if Globe writer would ever say anything positive about the N.D.P.?
Weak response: the NDP is now official Opposition, it gets serious questions from journalists, not puff pieces
Q.: what is NDP position in the event of a 3rd referendum and debate leading up to that?
will Mulcair risk alienating soft-nationalist and sovereignist voters from 2011?
that is a serious question, I don't know the answer
Funny enough..The official government has been mute.
The media should be all over them but unsurprisingly,they're not.
I agree with the feds being mute right now:
shut up! during a QC provincial campaign, worst possible reaction to get involved
the issue is: following a PQ majority on April 7th (unlikely now, but possible) would NDP be loudly federalist?
the writer above is quite right to say NDP is seen by voters as being "outside" that Yes/Non paradigm, where the players are the Libs and the Bloc, who have clear histories and identities in that area
On the other hand suppose the PQ loses.
then spring comes early,
and we all forget about it, there will be no ongoing, wrenching referendum debate again soon...
that is quite possible now, given the best polls suggest a 1 in 3 chance of a Liberal majority and 2/3 chance of that and/or a PQ minority, meaning no referendum
I hope the PQ loses...But sadly the alternatives aren't any better...Save for CAQ who IMO,are much worse than the PQ.
But if the PQ loses isn't there more room for the NDP to be a 'big tent' party? If so doesn't it make sense to hold off taking strong stances until the election is a certainty?
The NDP should have organized a QNDP right after th last federal election.
Now,no matter who wins,we're looking at a right wing government that will dismantle the social safety net and begin to impose a form of privatizing health care.
It's kind of late.
Right, but one forgets that they became the official opposition with over 50 new and many young MPs. The focus did need to ensure they were well prepared for the their roles, setup offices. And let us not forget that Jack died, and there had to be a leadership race. There was a set of priorities and they were the right ones.
As Jan pointed out the NDP had a ton on its plate and with a minority situtation it had no time to build a QNDP that could contest a provincial election.
I know another rightwing government will suck, but hopefully in four years there will be a new QNDP governement.
The problem with optimism is that it usually leads to disappointment.
Look its not my fault that the choices during this Quebec election suck, none of the current Parties were my idea, but either way thier simlly wasn't time to create a fully functioning party, that was competitive, and trying to do so before the Federal NDP was ready would have damaged the Federal NDP far too much. Look honestly by national standards the LPQ isn't that far to the right, as someone who has lived through the Mike Harris years you can do far worse, and its only temperary. This bump or whatever isn't about love of the Liberals its about the Majority of Quebecers not wanting another referundum. And yes contrairy to the media the majority of Quebecers aren't seperatists.
Well,I wasn't implying that our pitiful political landscape was your fault...That's ridiculous.
I'd say that the PLQ are the lesser of the 3 evils but any time someone says anything favourable about the Liberals on babble,federal or provincial,you get attacked which is evidenced on some comments I've made in other threads.
Fact is,even if the PQ wins a minority,they have all but adopted the entire CAQ platform and even with 10 - 12 seats,la CAQ wields power.
Sorry if I come across as a pessimist but I'm not...I'm a realist.
The QNDP stuff is an attack on Québec solidaire, a much more progressive party.
One whose seperatism means it will never appeal to a majority of Quebecers. Truthfully a QNDP that desided to being in PR would do more for QS then anything QS could achieve on its own, a victory for the QNDP would make things better for QS over the long term. QS will be lucky to crack 10% this elction and that's with PKP damaging the PQs lettwing rep. Its not far to condemn Quebecers to corrupt liberals and PQ to protect QS petty fiefdom in Montreal.
Back on a more federalism perpective if the PQ fails to win this will create even greater rifts and soul searching, and importantly pressure on the bloc to dissolve so it won't be a drain on the PQs resources.
While I can see a QNDP drawing support from QS, I would think that the party to suffer the most would be the Liberals. The main thing that keeps the Liberals in power is that you know referendums won't be an issue under their watch. So how is a left-wing federalist supposed to vote?
Besides, I really don't understand why there is such antagonism to the idea of a QNDP. Even should a QNDP form, Quebeckers may very well shun the party at the polls, and that would be their choice to make. Why is choice a bad thing?
I tend to think that QS should be involved in whatever comes to pass. I think the ideal solution would be a new party that brings in NDP supporters as well as QS, but is not exactly either party. This new party should be neither explicitly federalist nor sovereigntist, much like CAQ was trying to do, and should welcome lefties from both sides of the national question.
The truth of the matter is that most NDPers naturally gravitate to QS, as they should, but that becomes difficult to maintain when right-wing English-Canadian morons (mostly Liebrals) with little respect for nuance on the national question attack people like Boulerice for supporting them. If the QS was less stridently or vocally sovereigntist, this would not be a concern.
A right-wing CAQ-style party against a left-wing QS-style party, with no formal ties to any federal party and welcoming people on both sides of the national question, would allow real policy to be debated. Moreover, it would prevent the corrupt PLQ and the tired, rudderless PQ from polarizing things to their own advantage and against the interests of all Quebeckers.
This better expresses my thinking than what I wrote. And Winston, I think all of us English Canadians would be in full agreement that if Quebeckers did reject the QNDP at the polls, that's their right as well and we just have to chalk it up to c'est la vie.
Not any more strident then Brachina's stuff about "seperatists"... I agree that there are many possible solutions to the national question and the historical oppression of the Québécois people other than the current Federal state or outright independence, but I caught more than a hint of contempt in her post. Petty fiefdom? The PQ also started out in a handful of ridings, mostly in central-eastern Montréal.
Alexandre Boulerice and Françoise David work together openly on issues that have both a Federal and Quebec dimension, such as the question of so-called "self-employed" workers, transport etc. No problem here in the petty fiefdom where I'm proud to live. (We also have a 100% Projet Montréal council).
I didn't mean to insult anybody, just Quebec needs someone who can win next time for the left and QS is going to be able to do that. Maybe if it was willing spend the 50 odd years the NDP did to get where it is now, but Quebec doesn't have that kind of time.
As long as the QNDP offers PR QS stands to benifit over the long term, so if you want what's best for QS you should support a QNDP and put pressure on it to support PR.
Honestly I don't believe QS would lose any of its seats to the QNDP anyways, only votes where QS doesn't stand a chance.
I don't think splitting the left-wing vote between the PQ, QS, PVQ *and* a putative QNDP is any solution at all. Far better to adapt QS or create a new vehicle IN CONJUNCTION WITH QS ACTIVISTS that can convince people on the Left that the PQ has abandoned their values and provide a vehicle that sovereigntists, federalists and those in between can feel comfortable supporting.
Now that the PQ is being taken over by a rightwing fanatic like Peladeau - in what way, shape or form is there any "leftwing vote" going to the PQ? The message from the PQ is very loud and clear - they are now a rightwing ethnic nationalist party that has nothing to offer anyone even remotely left of centre.
You're correct.
The PQ has become Le Front National.
The current party has much more in common with Jean-Marie Le Pen than René Levésque.
There are people who are both left and die hard sovereignists.
A great many of them will vote for the PQ no matter what.
It has long been getting to be more like "different compartments". [That are different for different people.]
Sovereignty is back on the table again.
That doesn't make it a hot issue.
In fact, it may drop back to the background in a heartbeat.
Is there a problem with the NDP playing wait and see?
[Especially since so many voters new to the NDP voted for it a lot as an expression of wanting to address other things.]
Then don't talk about separatism and separatists. Talk about sovereignty and sovereigntists.
Yes, it is only the hard right and anglo nostalgics for the good old days when francophones had to "Speak White" who use the term "separatists" here. If you find the term sovereignist euphemistic, then indépendantiste, or pro-independence.
People here who are pro-independence aren't set on "breaking up Canada" as outsiders put it - they want their own country, for a variety of reasons. Harpercanada, with its Toronto-Calgary axis of money and oil, excludes Québec - it also excludes Atlantic Canada, and has been every bit as punishing to the Atlantic provinces.
The mentality of people on the left who continue to support the PQ is hard to understand if you haven't been living here for decades. Obviously I don't agree with them (I've never voted PQ) but for many, it is a party linked to the labour movement that has marked many important emancipatory moments - I think Karl Nerenberg touched on this in his rabble article about the elections. However, I think this is on the decline, in the sense that all the people I know who think like that are at least a few years older than I am, and most are technically seniors now.
I use Seperatist because its easier to spell. That being said, it completely accurate, lets not play games here, they want seperate from Canada, I understand the fairy tale of what a Seperate Quebec would be like, and its just that a feel good Fairy Tale that levels out any pains, challenges, difficulties, emotional termoil, suffering, and Chaos that would result.