As I wait in the dining room of the Hotel Saskatchewan for Jack Layton to join me for breakfast, I find myself feeling a bit disillusioned. I believe in the power of individuals and communities to create positive change at a grassroots level and prefer to direct my energy there than to get entangled in the distant and phony bumbledom of national-level politics. Thinking about, discussing and waiting for change from our federal leaders often leaves me feeling disempowered and frustrated. The fact that I’m flanked by the delightfully cynical political commentator Carle Steel doesn’t help.
But there’s a part of me that wants to believe that Jack is different. My friend once saw him put on a bike helmet and cycle away from an Ottawa pub, which I find earnest and endearing. And his environmental policies and ideas for political reform resonate with me. As we survey the buffet and make small talk before starting the interview, I do my best to swallow my disillusionment and focus on the possibility that Jack Layton is different from other politicians.
Breezing through the prairies on a whirlwind cross-country trip (he had arrived the night before and, after several back-to-back interviews was continuing eastward later that day), Jack packed a lot of discourse into our brief early-morning encounter.
“He seemed genuine, sometimes,” Carle said on our way home from the interview. I agreed. And as much as I crave raw, ego-free honesty from our country’s leaders, maybe that’s as much as we can realistically ask of our federal politicians – at least until grassroots movements grow loud and engaged enough to hold them to higher standards.
Here are a few highlights from our conversation.
The Sasquatch: Canadians have made it pretty clear that Harper’s prorogation of parliament twice in one year is not okay with them. Is the NDP talking about ways to reform the political system so that that can’t happen?
Jack Layton: Yes. We’re looking at all of the various options. They may involve constitutional change, because this is ancient tradition we’re talking about here. I mean, when Prince Charles prorogued Parliament in the 1600s, twice, the Parliament took action. It was probably out of place in the contemporary context. They beheaded him.
You said, “probably.”
I think some form of electoral decapitation would be the modern approach. What I’m excited about is [that] the new politics is grassroots and engaged. So here you have a Facebook site which was not prompted by any of the parties. Not to say that people who support the parties can’t be involved. What’s interesting is that there’s even Conservatives that are part of the anti-prorogation movement. So I’m very excited by the grassroots mobilization that’s going on.
When you were in Saskatchewan in December, you argued against public funding for nuclear development. Provincial NDP leader Dwain Lingenfelter is ambivalent on nuclear power, but there’s a significant grassroots movement within the party against nuclear that had a strong showing at the last leadership convention. What’s the federal NDP’s stance on nuclear development and uranium mining, and how is it that two leaders from the same party can have such different perspectives on such an important issue?
Oh, well listen, that’s not surprising. It’s a big country with lots of points of view. There’s a legitimate debate to have as to how one gets electrons moving, how one generates heat. The areas where there’s very profound agreement really are the starting points. One: massive investment in energy efficiency and conservation. Two: huge focus on renewable [energy]. Then the third question is what are the sources beyond renewable, and that’s where you start to get into some debates. Our federal party’s position is that nuclear should not be publicly funded, and secondly, that there has to be a solution for the waste. If those conditions were to be in place, we wouldn’t see a whole heck of a lot of nuclear on the go. Because, unsubsidized, nuclear can’t compete.
What is the biggest challenge that the left faces right now?
I think the biggest obstacle is the public sentiment that you can’t really make change. The collapse in voting turnout is, I think, a big, big worry. Because the people who aren’t turning out to vote, typically, are the ones who have kind of given up on the possibilities of change through electoral engagement. I think that’s something we all have to really tackle.
Most of our members have run many times before they’ve won. I mean, we’re the left. We’re against the big banks, and the multinational companies that own our resources and the massive media conglomerates that own our media, so you know, we’re climbing uphill. We’re like the Dall sheep, [that] stand on peaks that are on an angle. They are constantly going uphill. If you were to put New Democrats on a flat surface, we’d fall over. We wouldn’t know how to function.
So yes, it’s frustrating. And yes, we absolutely need proportional representation. But in one of those wonderful ironies, we can only get proportional representation when you get New Democrats elected in sufficient numbers, and with a leader that happens to be very committed to proportional representation.
Has there been any discussion within the NDP of linking forces with the Green Party? It seems like the two parties share similar visions. Proportional representation could help both parties. You both have progressive environmental and social policies. . . .
I think I’ve demonstrated, maybe more than any leader in our history, a willingness to work with other parties. In our current context, however, pre-electoral coalitions are (a) extremely difficult to put together, and (b) a violation of a voters’ rights. I shouldn’t decide that there won’t be a New Democrat choice for the people of, you know, Wascana. I’d be thrown out as leader if I did that. These are decisions for the local members to make. So my message to my friends who support different progressive parties, is take a look at the situation in any particular election.
The world’s in crisis. Corporate globalization and neo-liberalism are obvious failures. We’ve seen unprecedented economic instability and civil unrest, and I think that with all that destruction comes enormous opportunity. The political leaders who are going to succeed in the next few years are those that can offer some kind of innovative, believable and inspiring vision for the future. What’s your vision?
My vision is for a Canada that’s a part of leading the transformation towards leaving the planet in the kind of condition that my granddaughter, who was just born to my daughter, will be able to have the same kind of quality of life that we’ve had and will be able to have the kind of opportunities that we’ve had.
Do you think, though, that we can all expect to have that same quality of life forever?
Right now it doesn’t look optimistic, no. But if we don’t strive for it, and instead stay on this current old path, we’re in for big trouble. I remain relentlessly optimistic about what we can do together.
Thanks very much. We really appreciate you taking the time.
Keep up the good work. I mean, how many times have I sat down with people who’ve said, “What we need is our own press!” You know, a press that will bring a critical perspective to our work too, which I can tell that you’re willing to do, and I think that’s vital.