Thomas Mulcair, the deputy leader of the NDP, is weighing his chances of successfully running for the leadership of the party. What's holding him back? The lack of NDP party memberships in Quebec:
Mr. Mulcair blamed low membership numbers in Quebec as the biggest obstacle to his candidacy, an issue that has concerned him ever since he started discussing a leadership bid last month. However, Mr. Mulcair is appearing increasingly pessimistic, leaving the impression that he might skip the race even though the party sided with his plea for a campaign that will run into the spring of next year.
Since when does the number of people in Quebec, or the lack thereof, matter to Quebec's influence and power? Thomas Mulcair himself explained this point to stupid English-speaking Canadians:
Government House leader Peter Van Loan on Monday said one of the government's autumn priorities is to introduce legislation to create an electoral boundary redistribution formula that would better reflect population growth.
Under that scenario Quebec, which now has 24.4 per cent of the seats and a little more than 23 per cent of the population, would see its share of Canadian MPs decline to just slightly more than 22 per cent.
The NDP has argued that Quebec should be guaranteed to maintain its current share of the seats. That would require the 338-seat Commons to be swollen further by boosting Quebec's allotment to 82 or 83 seats, from the current 75.
Earlier Monday, Mulcair told reporters that such a move is consistent with the 2006 "nation" motion and the 1991 Supreme Court of Canada decision.
"It would be an irony to say that Quebec constitutes - the Quebecois constitute - a nation within Canada and then the first thing you do is you reduce the . . . weight of Quebecers within the House of Commons."
It doesn't matter that there are less people living in Quebec and more in BC, Alberta, and Ontario. It doesn't matter that the principle that drives democracy is one-person-one-vote. What matters is that Quebec is Quebec, and unlike other provinces to which people are making an effort to move (perhaps to enjoy lower taxes, less intrusive government, a business environment free of pervasive corruption, and of course, not being subjected to government-sanctioned and government-enforced linguistic and cultural discrimination), Quebec doesn't need to earn power within confederation.
Quebec is Quebec, and so Quebec gets power for free, now and forever.
So if that is the system which Canadians across the country must endure, if the NDP has its way, then why is the NDP exempt?
Surely the NDP could show Canadians how unity is enhanced by giving Quebec special status, including enhanced powers, by giving the party's paltry Quebec ranks greater weight in the upcoming leadership race.
The NDP has 1,695 members from Quebec, out of a national membership of over 80,000. So by the numbers, the Quebec contingent figures just over 2% of the vote.
Increase that by an order of magnitude. Insist that regardless of the numbers, the Quebec membership of the NDP counts for 24% of the vote total. That means each vote cast by each member from Quebec is worth 10 times the vote of a member from BC or Ontario.
That would solve Thomas Mulcair's problem, and would act as practical example of how the NDP would manage confederation, keeping Ontario and BC happy while guaranteeing Quebec a fixed share of the vote in Parliament.
Come on, Mulcair, show us how it would be done. Stand up on your hind legs and demand that Quebec NDP members get extra value for their votes just because they're from Quebec and people from Quebec are special.
Or maybe Thomas Mulcair is just all talk. You know the type. Complains that other people aren't doing the "right thing", but can't even imagine being forced to do the same thing himself. Call him on it, and all you hear are the mealy-mouth excuses of a coward.