The leaders’ debates

Posted by cwaddell under Election 2008, Election 2008 Media commentary

Christopher Waddell

Of course Green Party leader Elizabeth May should be in the televised leaders debates. 

But there’s another important argument for her inclusion, beyond all the antiquated rationalization about whether the Greens should be in because they have or have not elected an MP. 

It’s not just the fact that party has polled more than four percent of the vote nationally in the past two elections. Even leave aside the bizarre incongruity that 90 percent of the viewers to the English-language debate can’t even vote for one of the leaders in the debate, Mr. Duceppe, as his party doesn’t run candidates where they live.

The Greens should be in the debate because they are a publicly-financed party just like the other four. Since Jean Chretien changed party financing laws, any party that gets two percent of the vote nationally receives 43.75 cents from the federal government every three months for every vote it won in the last federal election.

In the quarter ended June 30, the Bloc Quebecois received $758,350.39 from the government of Canada and the Liberals got $2,187,074.37. The Conservatives topped the list with $2,623,890.17 while $1,264,370.74 went to the NDP and the Green Party obtained $324,231.20.

That subsidy also explains why the other parties don’t want the Greens in the debate. Every vote Ms May’s party takes from one of the other four costs that party almost $2 a year in lost income. It doesn’t sound like much but it adds up quickly. The best way to minimize the risk she will inherit the cash they think is theirs, is to keep her off the stage.

The television networks didn’t have the courage to stand up to that. In the end they have shortchanged the group to whom they should owe their primary loyalty – their audience.

The networks should set the rules, invite all five leaders to the televised debates and make clear from the outset the debates will proceed regardless of who attends. After all that’s always been a primary role for the media, holding to account those who are spending public dollars.  

Then it would up to each party to decide whether to be accountable by participating or suffer whatever consequences might flow from deciding it was above scrutiny. 

The ease with which the parties intimidated the networks, further undermines media credibility at a time when it is already under widespread assault. 

In fact, this sorry episode shows that televised debates are now such an integral part of federal election campaigns, control of the rules and management of the debates should be taken from the networks. The debates should be run by an independent organization as happens with Presidential campaign debates in the United States.

Christopher Waddell is associate director of the school and a former Globe and Mail Ottawa bureau chief, former CBC-TV parliamentary bureau chief and election night executive producer for CBC TV News.