Good Gerard, but what now?

Note: This post was written Monday morning, but for various reasons I’m just getting around to posting it now. I still think the thesis stands though. And after this I promise to try very, very hard to avoid posting on this nation stuff. :)

A few thoughts on the news Gerard Kennedy will be opposing the Harper Quebecois are a nation motion.

*I'm glad he's come to the decision that he has, but I have to wonder what took him so long to a position? I'd expect a leader/Prime Minister to come to a decision a little faster. After all, this issue didn't come out of the blue. But still, better late and right than quick and wrong.

*GK said: "I deplore that anyone would use this as a wedge issue for political gain." So do I, and I hope that NO ONE on either side of the issue does.

*This will undoubtedly give Gerard a boost in much of the country (not that he'd use it as a wedge issue for political gain, of course) but it raises serious problems for him in Quebec. He's going to find it difficult to get to 50 per cent plus one without some Quebec support, and if he does the prospect of a leader without even minimal support from Quebec is neither attractive nor desirable.

*That's where the What Now? question comes in. I agree this motion is a slippery slope. But a flat-out rejection, without some kind of alternative or at least the brushstrokes of one, is a dangerous idea. Gerard said:

"I respect the sense of identity shared by many Quebecers, reflecting a common culture, language, history and accomplishment and I will continue to promote that identity, rather than playing divisive political games with it."

That's nice sentiment, but sentiment alone isn't going to cut it. I want to know, both as a Liberal and as a Canadian, how is Gerard going to move us past this debate and what is he going do to address the concerns of those in Quebec then do view themselves as a nation?

*This leadership race isn't a one-issue campaign, and it shouldn't become one. I disagree with Stephane Dion on this motion; I would like to see him stand opposed to it. But I still support him for leader. Because my decision is based on more than one issue, and because I understand where he's coming from though. I was nearly there myself. I was back and forth on this issue before I decided to oppose it.

This motion isn't ideal. I think we both agree that we'd rather not be having the debate right now, and wouldn't were it not for the bold and decisive leadership of one Michael Ignatieff (thanks Iggy!). But now that we're here it can't simply be wished away.

Most agree that Quebecers/Quebecois form a sociological nation. We both think recognizing it will lead to demands for officialization. The counterpoint is that to vote against even informally recognizing what we all agree to be true is a slap in the face to the people of Quebec. Which is why it would be better not to have this on the agenda in the first place.

Stephane chose to vote yes and fight against the inevitable push for officialization with the same firmness and clarity he has fought the separatists with all his career. He's refusing to let the separatists own the term. Yes, he's saying, Quebec is a nation, and so are the First Nations, and the Acadians, and so on. It's a valid decision, consistent with his long record on the file. We just disagree on strategy. To try to call this a flip flop by Dion is to either be willfully ignorant of the issue, or just plain ignorant.

Because, when you look at it, it's really not that different from the position I'd have rather he took, and that Gerard did. Both agree, I think, that there's some sort of sociological type of nation there. Both are against any kind of officialization of such a recognition. Stephane, since the genie has been uncorked, favours giving at least symbolic recognition of the fact we all agree on as a compromise to Quebecers, while Gerard opposes even that symbolic recognition because it will lead to demands for officialization, something they both oppose.

*Which brings me back to what now? Stephane took his position to offer a compromise for those in Quebec that feel strongly about the issue. Like most compromises it's less than ideal, but that's the nature of compromise, and we have to live in the world as it is.

Gerard has rejected that compromise. That's perfectly valid. I, and millions of Canadians, are very happy that at least someone on the political scene shares our view and that our voices will be represented.

But it iss now incumbent on Gerard to offer an alternative, beyond "I respect the identity…" And he's going to need to come out with something more substantive soon. That will be the true test of his leadership potential. I hope he can come through.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers