Politicians change parties all the time and are surprisingly successful at doing so.
Sometimes, they do it on a matter of principle, when the party they belong to moves away from values that attracted them in the first place.
More frequently, they switch teams in anticipation of great personal gain.
Sometimes it’s a combination of both, as when their current party looks both changed and unelectable (see: provincial Tory defections to Alberta’s Wildrose Alliance).
Over the years, famous politicians have been shrewd and successful in jumping ship at the right time.
Winston Churchill left the Conservatives to become a Liberal MP, then switched back to become one of Britain’s greatest prime ministers.
Ralph Klein was a lifelong Liberal before he decided to enter provincial politics.
Knowing there was no hope of getting elected as a Grit in post-National-Energy-Plan Alberta, Klein became a Conservative. He was almost immediately embraced into the 1989 cabinet of Premier Don Getty, whom he succeeded three years later.
It’s easy to accept politicians who switch teams for prestige and profit when that leap does not cross core principles.
Federally and provincially, the Liberals and Conservatives agree on more than they disagree on. Like most voters, they embrace the broad middle ground.
In Quebec, it’s different. The Parti Québécois and its federal counterpart, the Bloc Québécois, want to change the fundamental nature of Canada by taking the province out of Confederation.
Both parties share a left-of-centre worldview that puts them comfortably in lockstep with the NDP on many issues.
It’s no surprise then, that Nycole Turmel has friends in both parties from her many years as a labour leader in Ottawa. She was the first woman elected to lead the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the nation’s largest public-sector union.
What’s surprising to learn is that while defending the interests of unionized Canadians from coast to coast, the interim leader of the federal New Democrats was also in a party whose core mission is to tear Canada apart.
The NDP caucus and party leaders had already unanimously elected Turmel when her separatist sympathies became national news last month.
She dismissed criticism outright, saying that she has long abandoned her Bloc Québécois party membership, and joined only as a favour to a friend.
In fact, she signed up in 2006 and only rescinded her membership to run for the NDP in the federal election this spring.
She also remained a member of another separatist group, Quebec Solidaire, until two weeks ago.
It’s passing strange that bedrock values and national vision should be so readily subsumed in exchange for a kindness to an acquaintance.
That’s true for somebody who leads a national labour organization with members across Canada.
It’s doubly true for somebody who aspires to lead a national federalist political party, even if it’s only for a short time.
If Jack Layton is too sick to return when Parliament re-opens in September, Turmel’s title will be Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper forcefully expressed sadness about Turmel’s links to separatists.
“I think Canadians expect that any political party that wants to govern the country be unequivocally committed to this country,” Harper said last week.
“I think that’s the minimum Canadians expect.”
It’s simple, succinct and true.
We only ponder why Harper’s rhetoric has not matched his actions.
Harper pussyfooted around with separatists by passing a Parliamentary declaration in 2006 that Québécois are “a nation” in a united Canada.
That move left some Quebecers mollified and the rest of Canada scratching its head wondering precisely what the prime minister meant.
More seriously, Harper has put separatist sympathizers into his cabinet.
Harper’s Transport Minister Denis Lebel is a former member of the Bloc Québécois.
Maxime Bernier, the disgraced former foreign affairs minister, is back in cabinet as minister for small business. As a former aide to PQ Premier Bernard Landry, Bernier signed a declaration expressing his commitment to an independent Quebec.
Harper’s Conservatives courted both men despite their publicly-recorded separatist views because they offered the Tories long-sought beachheads in Quebec.
Only six of Harper’s 167 MPs are Quebecers. Four are members of his 39-member cabinet. That’s one less Quebecer in cabinet than Albertans, from a province with a population more than twice as large as ours.
Prime Minister Harper could have shunned his two most-high profile ministers from Quebec in favour of more talented, committed federalist MPs from outside the province.
He could have given those posts to the other Quebec MPs, who are less proven in their job skills and commitment to Canada.
It’s also possible that Harper might never elect another MP from Quebec if he had shunned its leading Tory lights this year.
Politics is the art of the possible, where success often hinges on selecting the least bad option.
The New Democrats chose Turmel for a short-term post, while possibly being ignorant of her separatist background.
Harper chose Lebel and Bernier twice, while being fully aware of theirs.
Joe McLaughlin is the retired former managing editor of the Advocate.