Let me say right up front, in the interest of honesty, that I did not watch the Canadian Prime Ministerial Debate. Like many Canadians, I opted to tune instead to the US Vice-Presidential Debate on Thursday, October 2.
No doubt this was an unforeseeable scheduling error on the part of CBC executives and behind the scenes campaign managers. The date for our debate was probably set long before the schedule was fixed for Palin Vs. Biden. Nevertheless, common sense would dictate that, once the date for the US debate was known, our leaders would insist on a re-scheduling of the only English Language Canadian debate.
Perhaps the people at the CBC are sending us a message: We will show you what you SHOULD be watching, and to hell with what you WANT to watch. Hence the flipping back and forth of Canadian televisions between debates, resulting in many a well-formulated argument missing its mark, a concern that was remarked upon by Moderator Steve Paikin when he attempted to reign in a loud exchange between the leaders.
The few moments of the debate that I did witness (after the Vice Presidential Debate had ended) were a shock to the sense of aesthetics. Having just listened to two polished US leaders guided by a moderator of extreme professionalism, tuning into the less-than-formal Canadian “round table” discussion was akin to being doused by a bucket of cold water.
Of course, there is something to be said for the heightened realism offered by Canadian politics, as opposed to the spit-and-polish, ‘coached-and-scripted’ scene south of the border. At least we Canadians are offered more than the occasional glimpse of the true agendas of those who would be our leaders.
As incumbent, Conservative Leader PM Stephen Harper needed to appear “like a Prime Minister”, and my friends, who caught more of the debate than I did, assure me that he managed to do that. He remained calm, refusing to give in to his usual habits of “bully and bluster”.
Liberal Leader Stephane Dion, whose policies and platforms were so eloquently presented in the French Language debate on Wednesday night, was all but incomprehensible on Thursday, according to my trusted sources.
NDP Leader Jack Layton displayed his understanding of the issues and kept up the attacks on Mr. Harper, but failed to present an image of leadership that is sorely needed within Canada’s left-wing. Gone are the glory days of Ed Broadbent, Stephen Lewis and Bob Rae, any of whom one could imagine holding the highest public office in the land. Nevertheless, what Mr. Layton lacks in ‘image’ (I have heard him described as a Mississauga High School Teacher) he does make up for in integrity and policy.
Green Leader Elizabeth May confronted Harper aggressively on his environmental program, calling it a “fraud”. Ms. May was said to display a great deal of knowledge on those important environmental issues. On the other hand, it seems clear that a broader balance of knowledge and experience is required to become Canada’s Prime Minister. In addition, Ms. May suffered from her lack of language skills during the French language debate. Historically, our top office is a bilingual one. Anglophone and Francophone leaders throughout our history have worked hard to honour that tradition of mutual respect. It is doubtful that a unilingual contender will have much impact in this Election.
We face a growing basket of critical issues in this country, ranging from economic peril (despite Harper’s head-in-the-sand assurances to the contrary) to foreign policy to environmental and domestic social issues that spring from our determination to foster a mosaic-style multi-culturalism within our urban areas. These are all matters that are near to the hearts of Canadians, and together they comprise our challenges of the future.
If we are to maintain our historic strength as a nation, we need to understand our place on the world stage. In particular, faced with the extreme globalization of our planet, it is crucial that we recognise that our country’s success is closely tied to that of the global community, most especially to the fate of our American neighbours.
Being honest about our stature does not diminish us – to the contrary, our global influence can be heightened by integrity and sense of realism. However, if we continue to present gross displays of ego (such as the airing our own English Language Debate directly opposite one of the most anticipated American debates in recent history) then we will suffer the results of our misguided arrogance.
So, like many Canadians I did not watch the debate. As a result, I was left scrambling in an effort to conduct my own mini-poll, in the hopes of developing a more-or-less informed opinion as to its outcome. Sadly, most of the people whom I spoke with were among the ranks of the “channel-flippers”. In fact, I was not able to find a single person who admitted to watching the Canadian debate in entirety.
The general consensus, though, among those I polled was clear: Voters seem to be taking the “ABC” stand this time around – ANYONE BUT CONSERVATIVES.
As a long-time NDP supporter, I am wrestling with my own conscience. Do I want to be responsible for possibly splitting the left-leaning vote and handing PM Harper another term?
Donna Carrick, October 3, 2008
