The biggest debate of Jagmeet Singh’s political career might have been against himself two years ago: Should he quit as deputy leader of the Ontario NDP to run for the party’s federal leadership?

As Singh considered making the leap, his passion for human rights proved decisive, likely because it’s his first love. Years ago, for example, he spoke out forcefully for the rights of women and minorities in India and paid a price — provoking the Indian government to deny him a visitor’s visa.

Today, given that history, why not speak out more clearly and forcefully for human rights here at home?

At a time when pious Quebecers are being persecuted for their beliefs — denied the human right to wear religious garb as teachers or judges — Singh’s New Democrats have lost their voice. For fear of losing votes in Quebec.

Singh is hardly alone in pulling his punches. Like the other parties, the NDP believes it has too much to lose in the election if it is seen as meddling in that province’s obsession with the suppression of fundamental religious freedoms.

Unsurprisingly, they are all desperate to avoid overstepping in Quebec while minority rights are trampled upon. But in Singh’s case, that crass calculation is doubly misguided.

Yes, it is wrong in principle for any and all of our national political leaders to duck their responsibilities to protect minority rights. But it is also wrong in practical political terms for Singh to box himself in as the others have.

The NDP not only has a moral imperative but a political motive to do the right thing.

By wading in to the debate with clarity, instead of waffling, Singh could come out ahead — with his head held high and a higher seat count to boot. For unlike his rivals who dream of winning a large number of seats in Quebec, Singh cannot harbour such fantasies.

The NDP’s “orange crush” triumph in Quebec has long since petered out, because the party is no longer in the right place at the right time. When he ran for the party leadership, many suspected that Singh wearing a turban would hurt his party’s prospects in Quebec, and they were not wrong.

To its credit — or perhaps it could not ignore the elephant in the room — the NDP addressed the challenge directly in an advertising campaign showing Singh applying a turban to his long hair, with his reassuring voice-over in French. To his discredit — yet more political calculus — Singh then tries to be too clever by half, by pivoting to a tangential point.

He argues disingenuously that as a minority Sikh, his religious heritage better equips him to understand the linguistic apprehensions of Canada’s minority francophones living (as a majority) in Quebec. Except that he then makes the logical leap — in the ad and in his campaign speeches — of skipping over the plight of religious minorities so that he can obsequiously display his solidarity with Quebec’s voting majority.

It is the kind of jujitsu move that a martial arts expert like Singh has practice in pulling off. Except that he is not offering protection to the people who need it most.

If Singh had more potential in Quebec for October’s election, his pivot might have a point, if only tactically. Instead, it comes across as pointlessly pandering.

On present trends, which are remarkably depressing for the NDP, it has far less to lose than any other party. The burden of Singh’s bad luck in Quebec is a blessing in disguise, for it liberates him to do the right thing — morally and politically — so why not take a gamble on being true to himself, and the values he has long fought for?

Singh’s boldness could produce an added bonus, for public opinion in that province is by no means monolithic. The truism of “two solitudes” applies as much within Quebec as beyond its borders, for there is a major chasm between the island that is Montreal — home to many of the pious Muslims, Sikhs and Jews most directly affected by restrictions on the hijab, turban and kippah — and the rest of the province: urban versus rural, cosmopolitan versus nationalistic, bilingual and multicultural versus unilingual and traditional.

Many in the labour movement have condemned the religious restrictions in Bill 21 — especially teachers’ unions whose members are directly affected.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

If Singh were to speak out, and call for the federal court challenge that others are avoiding, he would undoubtedly antagonize many Quebecers — most of whom probably wouldn’t vote for him anyway. But by showing leadership, Singh could rally voters in Montreal and beyond, because an impassioned critique could also galvanize people in the Greater Toronto Area, not to mention Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg and all major urban centres where diversity resonates.

The NDP is already losing ground in Quebec, in part due to Singh’s turban. With so little to lose and so much to gain, far better to show bold leadership by saying what needs to be said — and what other leaders won’t say.

Isn’t that why Singh jumped into federal politics two years ago?

Read more about: