First, a disclaimer: I have known Nycole Turmel since 1985, and worked with her closely as an executive vice-president of the PSAC from 1994-2003. Over the years we had many disagreements, and I can’t say we were the best of friends, but I can report three things with confidence based upon long experience: 1) Nycole lives, eats and breathes social justice values and concerns, 2) she is a pragmatist, as any labour leader worth his or her salt has learned to be, and 3) she has been, ever since I have known her, a staunch federalist.
She is now under snide political attack from the chattering pundits for having been a member of a federal party, the Bloc Québécois, from 2006 to earlier this year. Why not throw in her provincial support for Québec solidaire while they’re at it?
The fact is that she was a Quebec NDPer when the NDP in that part of the world was little more than a groupuscule. I was not pro-NDP for many of my years in the labour movement, seeing us as being the party’s captive even against the interests of our own members—a suspicion borne out by the unsteady reign of Bob Rae in Ontario and what I can only describe as obsequious labour support at the time. I have been a card-carrying member for the past several years, however, as more progressive voices in the party came to the fore. But, until recently, not in Quebec.
Nycole was not to be moved, however. As a Canadian labour leader, she was a party member in the teeth of Quebec nationalism, when that was anything but politically fashionable in her home province.
“I’ve been at this for decades,” Turmel said. “In the 1990s, I chaired cross-country NDP panels that consulted Canadians on their ideas about progressive government. I served as associate party president under (former leader) Alexa McDonough and moderated the leadership process that saw Jack Layton elected (in 2003).”
Now, even the critics of Quebec nationalist formations concede that their social agenda has been (until recently, at least) socially progressive. The BQ has always been a bit of a mixed bag, in fact, but under the leadership of Gilles Duceppe it took principled social and economic stances in the House of Commons.
That’s where Nycole’s pragmatism comes in: as a retired labour leader now living in the Quebec milieu, she supported the regional parties there who stood for social justice. Until the Orange Crush earlier this year, the NDP in Quebec presented no viable alternative to the status quo, provincially or federally: its miniscule support in the polls made it irrelevant on the Quebec scene.
But for promoting social justice (and make no mistake, that’s her main sin in the eyes of the usual suspects) she is now coming under assault from the Right, and from Liberals hoping to leverage their way back into the public consciousness by tarring her as a closet separatist sympathizer—the exact opposite of the truth.
No point linking to the various blogposts, Tweets and press commentary: that goop is too easy to find at the moment, so readers can go looking if they must. Here’s one good counter, which I commend to everyone’s attention.
Despite our past differences, Nycole is in my view a wise choice for interim leader of the NDP. If she can chair a fractious union convention (as she has done several times), she can run her caucus with ease; she can bring her experience and mediating skills to the fore when dealing with the rookies, especially those from her home province; and her English, despite some of the early reports, is entirely serviceable—Stéphane Dion she is not.
She has a tough road ahead of her, being the voice of the Official Opposition for the foreseeable future. At the very least, fairness demands that she be given her shot. Not that the pundits have ever been in a mood to be fair, of course, but she spoke effectively through the media noise and clamour when she was the PSAC National President, and she’ll do so again. You can count on it.