Canada will not implode because of a few dozen women wearing face coverings from the Stone Age, but those who say it’s not a big issue because so few actually hide themselves from head to toe are missing the point.

It’s really about the kind of society we want to live in.

It’s about being a free and open country whose citizens are not subjugated and where all women are treated as equals

It looks like Tom Mulcair has gotten himself into a bit of a pickle on this one.

The pretender to the throne is adamant that faces can be covered in citizenship ceremonies.

In the flashpoint which is Quebec that stance may cost him dearly.

The Bloc Quebecois is already smelling blood and the campaign is taking a decidedly nasty turn.

Le Devoir this week published a front page photo of NDP candidate Anne Lagacé Dowson’s vandalized campaign sign depicting her wearing a niqab.

There are certainly more important issues in this campaign than the niqab.

Too many Canadians have become economically marginalized.

Canada, in many ways, has become a less caring place and many might argue we have lost our moral centre on many issues.

But covering one’s face is one of those issues that is wrapped in symbolism.

It’s something that voters can understand and it’s an issue that may make many in Quebec and elsewhere think twice about how they will vote.

50%+1

It’s not the only thorny issue that Mulcair has to deal with in Quebec and federalist voters should pay attention.

This week some long-time veterans of the language and constitutional wars went to Ottawa to ask the NDP leader to provide some clarity.

The NDP, you see, passed something called the Sherbrooke declaration in 2005.

It supports the notion of 50% plus one to break up the country.

It ignores the Supreme Court of Canada’s clear position which ruled that a clear majority on a clear question was needed.

Then came the federal Clarity act which reinforced the court’s requirement of a mutually-agreed standard.

The Special Committee for Canadian Unity says a future prime minister needs to tell Canadians where he would side in the event of a 50% plus one vote.

Committee member Keith Henderson said “I expect the future prime minister of my country to rise to my defence and tell Canadians clearly, whether you live in BC or Quebec, your rights to be a Canadian are going to be protected and preserved. I haven’t heard that yet from Mr Mulcair.”

Now the NDP does have a thoughtful platform that is attractive to many voters but for a potential prime minster of Canada to promise to tear up a federal law and ignore the highest court in the land is wrong and dangerous.

Some may argue that the issue is only a paper tiger that the separatists are playing a losing game.

I would argue that nothing is ever that simple in Quebec and the wolf is always at the door.