Canada"s Leadership Debates in Limbo

Whispering in the Wind (WITW 77) May 27, 2015

The political upheaval three weeks ago in Alberta has many still shaking their heads in amazement – some have called the Rachel Notley, NDP win, revolutionary.  As to the cause of the “Orange Wave” there is no doubt, the people of Alberta were simply fed-up with the status quo, entitlement politics being exercised by the leaders on the “right” side of the political spectrum.  What is equally amazing is the impact of the NDP win on national politics, and that leads to a pair of imposing questions:  can and will the Alberta experience be repeated in another election that is less than five months away?  Following is my take on an issue that has gained a lot of attention in the press.  The issue, public argument and debate in an election setting is exposing a cunning strategy that could backfire on the prime minister, and the possibility of arrogance being the trigger that generates a wave of public dissent against the status quo? 

The Debate on the Debates

Mr. Harper had to be astonished by the NDP win in Alberta and particularly the Rachel Notley’s win over Jim Prentice at the leadership debate held less than two weeks prior to the Alberta election.  In my view, the Alberta experience was a major wakeup call for Mr. Harper that required significant, immediate changes to the Conservative Party re-election strategy.  It was announced:  Stephen Harper would not be appearing at the major TV debates put on by the major TV broadcasters, a major shock to a tradition that started in 1968 and historically garnered an estimated 10 million viewers.  Mr. Harper, through his party machine, is proposing a very different structure for the debates – covering narrow, very specific topics and issues.  How this debate issue sorts itself out is anybody’s guess, but the major TV broadcasters have made it clear, they will proceed with their traditional debates, with or without the prime minister.  My thoughts on the debate issue:

If Mr. Harper had his way, there would be no public debate on what could or would challenge his record as prime minister.

One of the more telling features of Mr. Harper’s management style is his determination to control any agenda on any issue that might beset him.  For the present, Mr. Harper’s controlling attitude is working, to the chagrin of his political adversaries.

Following the Harper format for the debates, he would disallow subjects and questions that aren’t specifically related to the agreed to, narrow subject being debated.  Mr. Harper appears to have agreed to two debates using his format; one on the economy and the other on foreign policy – subjects where Mr. Harper feels he has the advantage?  Subjects that deal with issues before the courts; actions that are deemed unconstitutional; issues that are considered “internal management” practices would not be raised or allowed in the debate, by agreement with the debate organizers.

As to the reaction by Stephen Harper’s main adversaries, Thomas Mulcair is willing to debate Stephen Harper anywhere and everywhere.  Justin Trudeau hasn’t made up his mind or he is holding back on his decision for unknown reasons.  Mr. Harper, he has sparked a controversy that reveals an arrogant, controlling approach to politics – it might be the spark that triggers a wave?