All things considered, the New Democrats had a good caucus meeting in Montreal this week, ahead of the House resuming on Monday.

A simmering insurrection against Tom Mulcair’s continued leadership of the NDP had become the media fixation going into the event, and both Mulcair and the caucus dealt with it, effectively and publicly, in the first morning session of the two-day meeting.

Mulcair is staying until the leadership convention in October 2017. Period. He said so, as did the caucus, in giving him standing ovations at his opening speech to which the media were admitted. “Are we united?” caucus chair Charlie Angus yelled as the caucus later crowded behind Mulcair by a bank of hotel elevators. The answer was a resounding yes.

What they may have said behind closed doors, and over drinks, is another matter. But they successfully presented a united front. And when you consider what’s happened to the NDP over the last year, from the election meltdown last October to the train wreck of the party’s convention in April, that’s a significant achievement.

Going from first in the polls at the start of the campaign to third place on election day, led to Mulcair being the first Canadian leader ever to be deposed in a leadership review, as he was by a 52-48 margin in Edmonton. Having been pummelled twice, Mulcair was probably entitled to spend the summer regaining his strength and spirit at his family cottage in the Laurentians. At the caucus, he looked tanned, rested and ready to resume play next week.

The grumbling among sitting and defeated MPs was largely about his absence from the summer circuit, as well as a serious decline in party fundraising, not to mention the NDP’s slide to the low teens in the polls.

Having been pummelled twice, Mulcair was probably entitled to spend the summer regaining his strength and spirit at his family cottage in the Laurentians. At the caucus, he looked tanned, rested and ready to resume play next week. Having been pummelled twice, Mulcair was probably entitled to spend the summer regaining his strength and spirit at his family cottage in the Laurentians. At the caucus, he looked tanned, rested and ready to resume play next week.

But the House is a place where Mulcair has home ice advantage. The NDP may have been reduced from official opposition to third party status, but Mulcair can still score lots of points in question period.

In Montreal, he said the NDP plans to hold the Liberals to account during the fall sitting. On a new health care accord with the provinces, for one thing. On climate change and a carbon price, for another, in implementing the Paris Agreement and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. On pipeline approvals, or not, beginning with the twinning of the Kinder Morgan line to Vancouver harbour. On overseas troop deployments, notably a UN role in Africa that may be more peace enforcement than peacekeeping. On delivering promises to First Nations on housing, education, water and a decent standard of living. The Liberals as well as the NDP both endorsed all 93 recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. In government, the Liberals have an opportunity to deliver, and the NDP can make it their mission to see that they do.

While the Liberals successfully wooed progressive voters, and framed a ballot question of change, they are moving back towards the pragmatic centre, as they always do in government. There is an opportunity during this sitting for Mulcair and the NDP to re-claim the high ground as the conscience of the progressive left, as well as the labour movement and young voters. This is the party of Tommy Douglas, Ed Broadbent, and Jack Layton. Those names personify the NDP’s significant brand equity.

Even the NDP’s present plight can be considered in a brighter light, when viewed through another prism.

The 44-member NDP caucus is the second largest in the party’s history. It’s not the Orange Wave, with 103 members in the class of 2011. But then, that was about Layton, especially in Quebec, which returned 59 NDP members in that historic election.

Okay, not the Orange Wave, but the NDP need to get over it, and work with what they’ve got.

The party is represented in the House in every province from Quebec to British Columbia. They have 16 seats in Quebec, eight in Ontario, two in Manitoba, three in Saskatchewan, one in Alberta in 14 in BC.

The NDP caucus is close to achieving gender parity—18 of their 44 MPs are women.

There is a lot of talent, including several first-term members with promising futures.

They have 13 months before their leadership convention, and so far as that goes they will have media coverage to themselves once the Conservatives elect their new leader next spring.

While no one is in a hurry to declare for the leadership, it’s not as if no one wants the job. Peter Julian, Charlie Angus and Niki Ashton are names already in the mix. But if Julian, for example, were to declare this fall, he would have to relinquish his role as House leader; and the same would apply to Angus as caucus chair and Ashton as employment critic.

Two of the brightest lights of the NDP caucus, Nathan Cullen and Alexandre Boulerice, are taking a pass on the leadership race. Cullen wants to focus on his role as the NDP lead on the Special Committee on Electoral Reform, which begins a 17-city swing this week. Cullen already has limited time with his young family over the time it takes to travel back and forth between Ottawa and his riding of Skeena in northern BC. Basically, it’s a day out and a day back.

The NDP has its share of challenges in re-gaining standing in the polls. They need to get back to 20 per cent to be competitive again. For that matter, the Conservatives need the NDP to get back to 20 per cent, because every one of those votes will come from the Liberals, now cruising in the high 40s.

From challenges to opportunities, the House is the place for the NDP beginning on Monday. And there’s no one better to lead them in the House than Tom Mulcair, beyond the funk and back in fighting form.

Mr. Speaker, it’s time to recognize the Hon. Member from Outremont.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.