An extraordinary thing happened at a recent Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) conference in Montreal. More than 800 CAW-elected local leaders from workplaces across the country heard from Gilles Duceppe, leader of the Bloc Quebecois (and, incidentally, a long-time trade unionist). How would our union’s rank-and-file leadership respond, I wondered, to a speech from an avowed sovereigntist?

The delegates gave Duceppe a standing ovation — three times. Their new respect for Duceppe was based on his dedicated fights in recent years around numerous progressive and labour issues (including benefits for unemployed workers, anti-scab legislation, industrial development policy and opposing the war in Iraq).

Our local leaders are salt-of-the-earth people, passionate Canadians to their core. After all, the CAW was created almost 20 years ago as a reflection of our members’ desire for Canadian independence. The fact that these delegates would respond so warmly to a sovereigntist is a telling sign, I believe, of a shift in attitudes towards Quebec within the left in English Canada.

For the most part, Canada’s left has experienced its own “two solitudes.” Progressives in English Canada and Quebec haven’t worked well together over the years. The vast majority of the Quebec left has viewed independence as a precondition for winning more progressive economic and social policies there. Our focus in English Canada on defending Canadian independence against free trade and globalization didn’t resonate well in Quebec. In my view, the left in Quebec as well as the rest of Canada was weakened by our general failure to find common cause.

This was starting to change somewhat, even before the election. In Quebec, the left is working to find a more effective voice within a broader independence movement that doesn’t always respect labour and social principles.

With a minority government, the NDP and the BQ now have an opportunity to exercise real influence with the federal Liberals — but only if they work together. The left had a major influence during the election campaign forcing even the Conservatives under Stephen Harper to defend national health care, and the Liberals were forced to propose a national child care plan. The “left” was a clear winner in the election: the NDP and the BQ increased their combined vote by 10 percentage points, while the Liberals and Tories both lost votes. Now we must leverage those electoral results into legislative victories on core progressive issues (like medicare, child care, Kyoto and peace). This will require a new left partnership between Quebec and English Canada.

As a first step, Jack Layton (who also addressed our Montreal conference and received an equally warm reception) and Gilles Duceppe should agree on a short list of shared priorities and work to ensure they are legislated. By allowing Quebec to establish its own programs in key areas (as it did with the QPP), the left’s demand for an expanded federal social role can be reconciled with Quebec’s demand for more autonomy. And by jointly exercising some real legislative clout, both parties would deliver an essential and long-awaited message to their supporters — namely, that left-wing politics can make a difference.

Prime Minister Paul Martin was also invited to speak to our conference but was unable to attend.

Ultimately, this shorter-term strategic co-operation should be broadened into a deeper and more permanent partnership. For example, I fail to see the point of running a full slate of NDP candidates in Quebec. Some complain the BQ isn’t left enough, and I agree (the same complaint is often heard about the NDP, too). But the solution is not to pretend that a federalist party, with little support historically in Quebec, will ever make significant inroads with Quebec’s independence-minded voters. Some kind of electoral co-operation between the NDP and the BQ in Quebec could reinforce their legislative co-operation in the House of Commons.

A new openness to working with the sovereigntist left will naturally spark controversy, including within the NDP. For example, some powerful party figures criticized Layton during the election for his stance against the Clarity Act (even though it was Layton, not his critics, who reflected official party policy, and even though the claim that the Clarity Act had “demolished” separatism was itself demolished by the BQ’s triumph).

These folks need to face political reality. The left actually has 73 seats in the House of Commons (19 with the NDP and 54 with the BQ). But as long as they stay mired in their two solitudes, they won’t make nearly the difference they could.

This challenge is not just for the two left parties. The whole left community needs to embrace a more genuine partnership between Quebec and the rest of Canada. We’ve tried this in the labour movement, quite successfully. For example, the CAW has an autonomous Quebec wing, the TCA (it endorsed the BQ in the last election, while the national union supported the NDP). This way, our Quebec members are masters in their own house. But both sides are stronger than if the Quebec workers just went their own way.

A united Canada that is committed to social and economic justice for all its citizens would surely strengthen the commitment of the people of Quebec to Canada.