Last evening, I attended a campaign event for Avi Lewis that took place in Hamilton, Canada (where I live). Lewis is running to be the new leader of the New Democratic Party in Canada, which was virtually obliterated in the federal election last Spring when many Canadians chose to “strategically” vote for the Liberals and Mark Carney. Lewis is projected to win the majority of votes on the first ballot of the election which opened yesterday and continues until the last week of the month.

I have been increasingly troubled that throughout the long campaign period, none of the NDP leadership candidates has addressed disability in any way, with the exception of Tanille Johnston, an Indigenous candidate, who, in a recent Zoom webinar that The Breach organized, spoke about accessibility as a means of empowerment. As a member of the NDP, I attended the event with the hope that I would have the opportunity to air my concern about the party’s ongoing neglect of disabled people in Canada.

As it happened, I spoke with Avi Lewis for several minutes before the event. I was seated in the front row, which was reserved for “people with disabilities and seniors” and he came and sat beside me. Perhaps he had been forewarned about me: when I had taken my seat, one of the organizers quickly came over and indicated that the seats were to be left vacant for members of the above groups. In response, I said: “I am one and I came with the express purpose of hearing what Avi Lewis has to say about disabled people.” I also mentioned the possibility that I might blog about the event today at the philosophy group blog that I coordinate.

How should I sum up my impressions of the pre-event discussion that I had with Avi Lewis and the event itself? Reflecting on the event itself, is, I think, a window to Avi’s position on disability and its place within his politics.

Avi’s own speech was preceded by a local musician and four other speakers. The event was not livestreamed, nor was there ASL or captioning. Before the event, in response to my query about livestreaming, the organizer who spoke to me about seating told me that providing it would be too expensive, a remark that I countered/refused. None of the four other speakers mentioned disabled people or disability in any way, except a union leader at the central library here who spoke about addicts and the struggles of the library to fulfill their needs and the needs of other marginalized groups in this part of the city. (Given that I live in the vicinity of the library and use it, her remarks were especially appreciated.) All of the speakers and the musician appeared to be white and nondisabled.

Because of Hamilton’s demographics and its history as an industrial centre of Canada, as well as the history of the NDP itself, the crowd, the speakers, and the room (which was packed) seemed to comprise labour union organizers predominantly. Speakers addressed a labour crowd–“workers”–accordingly. The category of “workers” is of course exclusionary (go here) and the NDP needs to critically interrogate its reliance upon it and the lacuna in public policy that this reliance reproduces. Indeed, after Avi told me that he would not be talking about disabled people in his speech, I asked him point blank if he would not be doing so because he wanted to directly address “workers.”

He did in fact mention disability in his speech by referring to the Canada Disability Benefit, which we discussed briefly, and he acknowledged to the room that we had done so. In our pre-event discussion, he had explained to me that he knew about the benefit and the ordeal to apply for it and actually receive it because he and Naomi Klein have a son “who has autism.” Note the language used: not the preferred terminology of autistic people.

This linguistic difference is significant because it is indicative of the medicalized understanding of disability that seems to condition Avi Lewis’s approach to disability. Although at one point in our discussion, he said that the situation of disabled people is an important concern for him, at another point he suggested that it was not a priority at the moment. When I mentioned MAiD, he was quick to say that it is dangerous; yet, he seemed not to be informed about the legislative history of its development, nor the specifics of the legislation, nor the terrible position on it taken by the former NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, nor the broader eugenic social forces of which it is a piece. Nevertheless, I pointed out that Singh had enabled the Liberals to further advance their eugenic project by voting, as he did, in favour of Bill C7 and encouraging others in the party to do so.

Although Avi reassured me that his attention to disabled people is demonstrated on his campaign website, I have found little on the site to justify him saying so. I spoke briefly with one of the other disabled people in the front row who seemed to confirm many of my impressions of the event.

Avi Lewis filled the room with energy and passion. Nevertheless, the NDP seems decades behind with respect to a critical analysis of disability and ableism. My former MP, the wonderful Matthew Green, was one of the only elected NDP members with such an analysis. Now there is only Leah Gazan.