What would Jack Layton say about Linda McQuaig’s push for a two-person debate?

Four federal by-elections have been called for Nov. 25^th, including in Toronto Centre. While a new poll shows the Liberals comfortably ahead, I think it’s going to be a real battle. And so does NDP candidate Linda McQuaig, judging by the gambit she launched this weekend.

McQuaig is challenging Liberal candidate Chrystia Freeland to a one-on-one debate on income inequality, a topic they’ve both written about at some length. Such a debate would exclude every other party running in this election, such as the Green Party and, oh yeah, the folks with a majority government that are running the country, the Conservatives.

Big difference between @cafreeland & me on income inequality. Debate wd help #torcen residents decide. #ndp #lpc http://t.co/gGNEf9Xc8N
— Linda McQuaig (@LindaMcQuaig) October 20, 2013

Freeland isn’t taking the bait; she says she’s looking forward to many debates with all the candidates.

Looking fwd to taking part in all-candidates debates over the coming weeks. Important for #torcen voters to hear from all parties #cdnpoli
— Chrystia Freeland (@cafreeland) October 21, 2013

Of course, the idea of excluding major parties for more limited debates isn't new. In 2008, the NDP and Conservatives teamed-up to bar Green Party Elizabeth May from the leaders debate. After pressure from the Liberals and Canadian citizens, the NDP and leader Jack Layton backed down, and the Greens were included.

McQuaig isn't talking about excluding the other parties she must not consider contenders from all debates though, apparently. Just from this one.

.@cafreeland Yes -- all candidates debates! How 'bout extra one on impt topic -- rising inequality -- we've both studied? #torcen #cdnpoli
— Linda McQuaig (@LindaMcQuaig) October 21, 2013

Of course, an additional debate of just two so-called front-runners isn't a new idea either. In the 2011 election, Stephen Harper challenged then Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff to a one-on-one debate that would have excluded the NDP's Layton. Ignatieff quickly accepted the challenge; Harper then quickly changed his mind -- he wanted it to replace all leaders debates. And that obviously wasn't on.

In retrospect, such a debate would have been rather arrogant and exclusionary, as fun as it all was at the time. The voters like to decide for themselves among all the candidates though, as the results of that election (vaulting the NDP into the official opposition) would show.

Which brings us back to Layton. What would he have to say about having a separate one-on-one debate that doesn't include other parties, as McQuaig is seeking to do in Toronto-Centre? Well, we know what he had to say about it in 2011:



Layton called this idea an "anti-democratic approach" the he didn't think was right or would be accepted by Canadians. He noted it "prejudges the position of Canadians" and compared it to American-style politics. So Layton, clearly, would have a problem with what the NDP is proposing in Toronto-Centre.

One has to wonder if McQuaig ran this by new NDP leader Tom Mulcair. And one also has to wonder what McQuaig and Freeland would debate, as most of McQuaig's ideas on the topic have been soundly and publicly disavowed by Mulcair as unrepresentative of the party's position.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Liberals and NDP pick their Toronto-Centre by-election candidates

A busy day in downtown Toronto on Sunday, as both the Liberals and the NDP picked their candidates to replace Bob Rae as the MP for Toronto-Centre at nomination meetings just a subway stop apart. It made for interesting comparisons, and I attendeed both meetings.

The Storify below shares some of the highlights of my live-tweeting and selected tweets by others, so I won't rehash the entire day at length. Rather, I'll share some thoughts on the result and, with respect to the other parties, the marquee match-up of the upcoming by-election: Liberal Chrystia Freeland and NDPer Linda McQuaig.

As a Liberal, I think Hollet would have concerned me more. She's more in the mold of a polished politician, more moderate, younger, has the Much Music cred, and would have been a threat to woo moderate Liberal/NDP swing voters. McQuaig is much more the voice of the left wing NDP base. She has national profile, communicates forcefully, knows her stuff, and will no doubt have a very well-funded campaign. She will energize their base, but can she grow it? I'm sceptical, but she'll need to in order to win.

I mentioned comparisons; here's one. We heard a lot more about Justin Trudeau and the Liberals from the NDP than we did about Tom Mulcair and the NDP (or the Harper Conservatives) from the Liberals. Sensible strategy, but also telling. In her pre-vote speech, McQuaig was already looking past Hollet and running hard against Freeland. The NDP are going to run a negative and personal campaign, against both Freeland and Trudeau. It will be interesting to see how the Liberals respond.

I got to see both Freeland and McQuaig speak today; again, another interesting comparison. Both highly intelligent, accomplished women, with strong and differing views on economic issues. Both very different styles. McQuaig is vocal, in your voice, knock you over with the point. Freeland is more conversational, build an argument, persuade you. Both styles have merit. I think McQuaig's forcefulness will begin to grate, but Freeland is going to need to fight back strongly too. If McQuaig's challenge will be to moderate, Freeland's will be to develop her skills as a retail politician that can give as well as she takes.

It is shaping up as a very interesting race, and I look forward to seeing how it plays out. No, I don't mean them both being journalists -- only other journalists care about that. We're probably about to hear more actual substantive debate about economic policy than we've had in Canadian politics in a generation, which ain't a bad thing (Harper only says he's focused on the economy, he doesn't much talk about it).

Elections should be about clear choices on important issues, and both sides will get a good hearing from Freeland and McQuaig.

UPDATE: Pundit's Guide was also at both meetings, and offers her take here with 23 differences between the two meetings.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers