The party is very centralised and didn't include indigenous rights as a large enough part of the platform, it was however still very much there and still a much better take than any major party had (actually called genocide what it was rather than just hand wave it as 'the past'), just was also weird that there was a very "nation-centric" focus that often placed english in quebec in the same category as Inuit and Metis. I think the other communist party made it more central, but I don't recall them running a candidate in my area and since they don't publish an entire novel as their platform they're a bit more accessible too. They also both seem much more about electoralism than revolution (maybe for legal reasons, canada is a fuck), and that doesn't sit well with some people.

Iirc the rules for this party are that party crit happens within the party but a unified party line should be presented and you aren't supposed to speak out about the things not put on the platform if it isn't a question asked of you - or at least if you do it has to be you speaking as you, not you speaking for the party. Its a bit dumb of a rule, understandable to prevent infiltration candidates that just try to sink the party with infighting, but it's very unmarxist to not recognize the need to deal with settler colonialism as a core part of a marxist party in a colonised land.