"We recognize the distinct identity of the nation of Quebec" Says Jagmeet Singh

61 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist

pietro_bcc wrote:

The provincial NDP of Quebec isn't officially connected to the federal NDP. Therefore QS members can be members of the federal NDP.

Well - that's incorrect. And as I said, it's the reason I didn't join the federal party.

This is from the latest provincial party constitution that I was able to find online (as of April 30, 2017):

Quote:

ARTICLE 3 :

MEMBRE 3.01

(a) Toute personne qui réside au Québec peut faire une demande d’adhésion au parti. (b) Une personne qui fait une demande d’adhésion : (i) s’engage à se conformer aux Statuts et aux principes du parti, et (ii) n’est pas un membre d’un autre parti politique provincial. (c) Il ne doit y avoir aucune discrimination à l’égard de l’adhésion au parti pourvu que la personne se conforme aux dispositions du présent article.

The emphasized portion, which is one of the conditions of membership in the Québec NDP, says: "... is not a member of another provincial political party".

If you have contrary information, please provide a quote and source.

 

cco

You can't be a member of the NPDQ and of QS simultaneously. However, since the federal NDP doesn't recognize the NPDQ (and hasn't recognized any Québec party since inviting the former branch to leave), you can be a member of the federal NDP and of QS. I know a great many people who are – in fact, one, Nima Machouf, is going to be the candidate in Laurier-Sainte-Marie.

pietro_bcc

What you posted doesn't contradict what I said Unionist.

I said that you can be a member of both the Federal NDP and QS at the same time and that is true. What you posted is the rules of the provincial NDP of Quebec which says that you can't be both a member of the NDPQ and QS, which is also true.

NDPQ and Federal NDP are two completely separate entities that are in no way connected.

robbie_dee

I did not realize that the Quebec New Democratic Party was operating as a completely separate entity. Interesting. It could pose the risk of some confusion for voters but I guess that for some time now Quebecers (and British Columbians) have had a "Liberal" party that was "liberal" in name only while actually being much closer to the federal Conservatives. So I guess it is not that strange.

In any case, here is Eric Grenier's take on the new strategy: Singh's Quebec strategy has the NDP fishing in a small pool (CBC)

Quote:

If the New Democrats are banking on riding on Québec Solidaire's coattails, they might be sorely disappointed. Léger found that just 18 per cent of QS voters backed the NDP, while more supported either the Liberals or the Bloc Québécois.

And it's a small pool from which to fish. The poll found the NDP at six per cent among supporters of the Coalition Avenir Québec, the centre-right party that won a majority government in the fall election. That six per cent of the larger pool of caquistes represents about as many actual voters for the NDP as its 18 per cent of solidaires.

It also suggests the NDP has modest ambitions in Quebec.

Most of QS's 10 seats overlap with seats held by the NDP. On the island of Montreal, QS's six seats are largely contiguous with the federal ridings of Laurier–Sainte-Marie, Hochelaga, Rosemont–La-Petite-Patrie, Outremont and Papineau.

Outremont is now occupied by the federal Liberals, while Papineau is the seat held by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. So tapping into QS's voter base in Montreal means holding three seats, assuming the NDP cannot defeat the prime minister or regain Outremont.

Elsewhere in the province, half of the federal riding of Sherbrooke voted for QS in October, as did much of Abitibi–Témiscamingue. Both of these are NDP seats. And then there are QS's two seats in the Quebec City region, which overlap with the federal ridings of Québec and Beauport–Limoilou. The first is held by Jean-Yves Duclos, a Liberal cabinet minister, and the other is held by the Conservatives.

Though the NDP lost by only a few points in these two ridings, the party is not currently in a position to make gains anywhere in Quebec — least of all in Quebec City, where the latest polls put the NDP at just 11 per cent support.

Altogether, this means that latching on to QS might only help the NDP hold five of its 15 seats in Quebec and give it an outside chance at gains in four others at most. But there are few QS votes to gain in the rest of the NDP's seats in central and eastern Quebec and in the Montérégie region — regions where QS captured less than 20 per cent of ballots cast last October.

Unionist

pietro_bcc wrote:

What you posted doesn't contradict what I said Unionist.

I said that you can be a member of both the Federal NDP and QS at the same time and that is true. What you posted is the rules of the provincial NDP of Quebec which says that you can't be both a member of the NDPQ and QS, which is also true.

NDPQ and Federal NDP are two completely separate entities that are in no way connected.

You're right! I'm wrong! Thanks for opening my eyes on this, pietro. This must have changed after my experience during the leadership race. This is from the 2013 federal NDP constitution (Article XIII):

Quote:

There may also be an autonomous provincial Party working within the provincial electoral jurisdiction known as the Nouveau parti démocratique – Québec. The NPD-Québec will conduct itself in general consistency with the social democratic principles of the New Democratic Party of Canada as outlined in the preamble of this constitution, and will be governed otherwise only by Article XIII. [emphasis added]

And this:

Quote:

Membership: for the purposes of federal individual membership in the province of Quebec, membership shall be open to every resident of Quebec, regardless of race, colour, religion, sex or national origin, who undertakes to accept and abide by the constitution and principles of the Federal Party and who is not a member or supporter of any other federal political party. [emphasis added]

So had I waited a year or so, I could have joined the federal NDP (unless I misunderstood everything right from the start)!

Sadly, I have no interest today in doing so. Though maybe Alex Boulerice and those like him will push the party to adopt one or two progressive principles, which they appear to have lost somewhere along the way.

Thanks again, pietro!

Unionist

cco wrote:

You can't be a member of the NPDQ and of QS simultaneously. However, since the federal NDP doesn't recognize the NPDQ (and hasn't recognized any Québec party since inviting the former branch to leave), you can be a member of the federal NDP and of QS. I know a great many people who are – in fact, one, Nima Machouf, is going to be the candidate in Laurier-Sainte-Marie.

Oops!!! Almost missed your post. I owe you thanks as well, cco!

When I'm wrong, I'm really really wrong.

Sean in Ottawa

The principle is really a bad one. The jurisdictions are different. It works both ways. In some cases people way want to join the provincial NDP and not the federal one and other they may be upset at an NDP provincial government and still want to be part of the federal NDP. Since the leadership is not connected and does not have a common set of postitions, how can the membership be connected. This policy is actually quite insulting to both federal and provincial members. The provincial AND the federal NDP both lose as each offers the other a reason why some of their supporters cannot participate, This weakens both.

The policy is based on a completely false concept of a single movement.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

This cuts both ways. For the federal party it will mean a big hit in membership in provinces like BC where the party fights provincially for power every election. Federally the NDP has large parts of the province that are not in the race at all and getting members for those riding associations will be tougher.

jerrym

kropotkin1951 wrote:

This cuts both ways. For the federal party it will mean a big hit in membership in provinces like BC where the party fights provincially for power every election. Federally the NDP has large parts of the province that are not in the race at all and getting members for those riding associations will be tougher.

Coming from BC, I agree with you totally.

Aristotleded24

Back to the issue at hand, as unionist has pointed out, supporting the Sherbrooke Declaration has been NDP policy since 2006. Not only that, but around that time, Stephen Harper declared in Parliament that Quebec is a nation, and that position was unanimously backed by Parliament. So I don't see why Singh had to make his announcement. Why reannounce something that practically everyone agreed on anyways? It looks to me like just another attempt by Singh to make himself look relevant by appearing to say something when in truth he said nothing of significance.

Pages