You call this progress?

Chantal Hebert obliquely suggests uniting the Canadian left into some weird, ungainly, many-headed behemoth (can you really see John McKay and Libby Davies chumming it up in caucus meetings?)

The suggestion is a bit of a walk-0ff in Hebert's column, but it's a canard that does get occasional press from some quarters, which is too bad: it would be quite challenging, and unpleasant, to merge two quite different parties (the centrish Liberals and the leftish NDP), to say nothing of throwing the Greens into the mix; and I'll reiterare my usual gripe that under some sort of proportional electoral system all this would be a moot point.

But apart from these qualms, Hebert's exempla need to be tackled in a little bit of detail. Hebert identifies two apparent problems for the left - progressive New Democrats and Liberals battling each other in urban ridings, and progressive Liberals and BQists battling each other in Quebec ridings.

The latter problem, of course, isn't really much of one, inasmuch as it's really part of the larger problem that is the BQ, a question (along with the murky world of Quebec politics) that I feel underqualified to comment on extensively. Let's just say that if it were in Quebec's interest to massively cut taxes and ban gay marriage, the BQ would likely support such things - that is to say, the fact that the BQ is a socially progressive party is thanks to the fact that Quebec is a socially progressive province but that it is Quebec, and not social progress, that comes first. As such, the BQ is a wild card, and I have no problem with Liberals taking out BQ candidates - I've often said that if Quebec ever achieves indepedence I'll be the first one to move there, but until that day comes I'm as staunch a federalist as they come.

The former problem, while more vexing, is not always a "problem" per say either. While I would prefer to see the maximum possible number of New Democratic MPs elected, for the purposes of the next election what I really want is the maximum possible number of Conservative MPs defeated. My first concern isn't therefore over ridings like Trinity-Spadina or Toronto-Centre - I'm more worried by places like BC's Fleetwood - Port Kells, where the combined NDP-Liberal vote outpolled the Conservative vote by almost 20%.

Of course, as I've already noted, the NDP and Liberals are different parties, with different principles, thus, my hatred of strategic voting - it's a particularly unfair game to force the electorate to play (die, FPTP!) That said, allliances between the NDP and Liberals have been one of the more common features of Canadian electoral politics.

Y'all want my advice? Libs and NDPers, sit down and figure out who got more votes in some key ridings last election (think BC, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and southern Ontario) - then concentrate your respective resources in the places you came closest to beating the Conservatives. If you're really committed to a progressive Canada, you know there's one goal that's more important that gaining partisan advantage: stopping Stephen Harper.