André Boisclair Used Cocaine. This is Why It Matters.

"Hmmm," she said wistfully. "André. my dear, this puts us into quite a predicament."

André Boisclair is currently partaking in the leadership campaign for the Parti Québécois. André Boisclair is an out, gay man. André Boisclair seems like a smart man. André Boisclair had a great chance of winning the leadership race.

André Boisclair had a youth filled with excesses, including the comsumption of cocaine.

"Hmmm," she said wistfully. "Quite a predicament."

What I'm about to say here may sound judgmental, but I don't really care. There are certain things that are not "choices" and "matters of personal opinion."

But first, let me say that I still want André Boisclair to win this thing. The Parti Québécois is a socially inclusive yet largely divisive party. It's main goal is to succeed in gaining a separate, sovereign Québec. Its social programs and its support of women and women's issues are admirable. Its stance on national unity (federation optional, separation a must), combined with its stance on the contiguity of provincial borders (Québec's borders are non negotiable) is wholly hypocritical. However, I am a strong proponent of the view that if we are going to play party politics, then constituencies that normally don't vote for them must vote for them in blocks. This will force them to pander to those constituences in order to retain votes/majorities and they will have to compromise.

Or, the PQ's voting membership could elect André Boisclair as their leader.

I think André Boisclair could put a different spin on things in the Assemblée Nationale. He just got a Master's degree in Public Administration from Harvard University and he was going to take up a job in consulting in Toronto. I think that alone shows that he sees a future for himself in the rest of Canada and in North America as a whole. His homosexuality will force him to consider the plight of minority groups in Quebec - at least in general. I think André Boisclair will make an excellent leader.

But...

I cannot condone his past or future drug use.

People who use drugs love to make excuses for themselves. Oh, but I was young. Oh, but I only smoke pot. Oh, but I got over it and aren't I a hero now? No. No, you're not. Not for me. There are thousands, nay, millions of people who do not get hooked on drugs. They don't use excuses. They don't need any help feeling good. I agree that life is hard, and I've had some hard times. During these times I felt that I would die from the pain, sadness and loneliness of it all. Just thinking about it can affect me adversely. Despite that turbulent time in my life, I'm alive. I'm extremely happy. Now, I feel extremely loved, supported and lucky. I remained drug free the whole time. Drugs lead to negative consequences. Drug use shows an inability to handle what life hands you. Not using drugs isn't just a case of: "oh, it doesn't do anything for me," it's a case of: "I don't need to use them, I am strong and I value my health." I could go into an extended examination of the social consequences of drug use and their ensuing effect on larger groups - family, society and the like - but, I won't do that.

This is about André Boisclair. It was not a youthful indiscretion as he first had tried to imply. He was an MNA and, later, a cabinet minister. This is the man to whom we entrusted our collective affairs. He abused that trust and did not do his best to pursue our interests in a clear-headed manner.

"Why," she asked him, head hung low, questions lingering. "Why should I vote for you again? Why should you represent me, a non drug user who disapproves of the sovereignist agenda? Is the combined force of our otherwise common interests enough to unite us?"

Le Devoir, a paper here in Quebec, asks some of these very questions:
Maintenant, André Boisclair, ancien ministre péquiste et candidat à la chefferie du Parti québécois, déclare qu'il a pris quelques lignes de cocaïne quand il était ministre. Cela le rend-il inapte à être un bon chef politique ? Cela l'humanise-t-il ?

To these questions the bewildered journalist seems to have no answer. His article ends abruptly, with no customary wrap-up, unable to give the public the pretense of a conclusion.

To answer the journalist's last question, does it humanize him, I would have to say, no. Undoubtedly, to be human is to make mistakes. But, as humans, not all mistakes are acceptable. Within this context, I don't know that his mistake was acceptable, especially given his reactions to the line of questioning. When pressed about this cocaine use, the cracks bleed through his skin and the tears rise to the surface. Why?

The answer to this question will determine whether or not I am willing to support André Boisclair in his political career.

Is he cracking because he is ashamed? Does he see now the gravity of what he did, the capriciousness with which he undertook his public service? Does he wish it had never happened? Or, is this a temper tantrum? Is he simply burning at the audacity of the reporters, and the public, who have chosen to investigate what he must consider his private business?

I am one of those people who doesn't fault a leader for getting upset, crying, speaking her mind or saying the truth despite certain adverse consequences. That, my friends, is what characterizes humanity. I don't think André Boisclair's displays of emotion make him weak, but I want to know the motivation behind them. Would he do this again? Does he think this is no big deal? Does he understand why people like me want to know?

I need to hear his explanation. He needs to understand what exactly public accountability in a public career is all about before he can be elected leader. He has a blog, but he hasn't commented about this yet. When I hear his explanation, I will make my decision.