Wednesday, June 16, 2004

The not-so-great debate

This morning, all chipper as usual, I asked my colleagues at Price Chopper if they had watched the political debate last night. Responses varied from "no" to "you're kidding, right?" (Actually, one person admitted to having watched the debate, but she said she's voting for Jack Layton, so now I'm wondering if *I* saw the debate last night.)
Look, these political debates are stupid. They degenerate within minutes into a verbal free-for-all, and anything of substance dissolves in nattering chatter. None of the politicians actually listen to each other: it's so much easier to argue with men made of straw.
Let's take, for example, Stephen Harper's views on abortion and same-sex marriage. He doesn't like either. But repeatedly last night, he said that he was willing to talk to Canadians, listen to Canadians, and put these issues before Parliament as free votes. At one point he firmly stated he would not pass legislation limiting "a woman's right to choose". But both Martin and Layton continued to act as if Harper strangles abortion doctors in his spare time, and, yikes, he strangles them twice if they're gay.
Tiresome. Really tiresome.
What we need in this country is reformed political debate. I have two suggestions:

1) Formalize the debate. This would mean opening statement, assertion, rebuttal, re-rebuttal, and closing statement. It would mean everybody else keeps silent while each leader has his or her say. Hell, we might actually hear something sensible.

---or---

2) Eliminate these debates entirely and replace them with simple question and answer sessions. The leaders need not even be in the same room. I don't want to hear about the sins of the past; I want to hear about the plans for the future.

I've rewritten Martin's and Harper's opening statements to reflect the kind of thing I mean.
I've ignored Layton, and I'll tell you why. I agree with the NDP on many social issues. But I have such strong antipathy towards their views on fiscal and foreign policy that I find myself unable to assume an NDP personality. Say it with me now: "Let's increase taxes on large corporations, so that they can leave Canada and take all their stinking jobs with them. Then we can all collect pogey in peace". See? It leaves the tang of manure in the mouth. Which reminds me: what's with Jack Layton's perpetual shiteating grin? *Creepy*!
I've also ignored Duceppe. Actually, he impressed me last night, and if I lived in Quebec, he'd probably get my vote. The man looks as though he drove to the debate in a hearse, but he knows his facts and he's quite astute even in his second language. That said, the party he represents wants to tear my country apart, and I have a wee little problem with that.

Anyway, no matter what Layton says, this race is between Martin and Harper. To wit:


PAUL MARTIN, LIBERALS:

Good evening, Canadians.
Before I say anything else, let me say this: I'm sorry.
I'm sorry that the sponsorship scandal happened under my watch. Yes, I knew about it, but I didn't have any idea of its sheer magnitude. It started out as a way to keep Quebec in Canada and it just spiralled out of control.
I'm sorry.
But I'm not going to stand here and let 'sorry' be enough. My first day in office, I cancelled the sponsorship program, and within a week I had initiated inquiries on several fronts. Those enquiries are ongoing. Should I lose this election, my final act as Prime Minister will be to ensire they continue, so that Canadians know the truth.
I think most Canadians are aware by now of the division within my own party concerning how best (and who best) to run this country. It has been my goal for years now to become Prime Minister, not for personal gain or prestige, but because I have many ideas on how to revitalize Canada. I want to put the past eleven years behind us and concentrate on where we are...and where we're going.
I believe in working with the provinces to improve accessibility to health care for all Canadians. I will invest money in home care, pharmacare, and daycare. Yes, I know you've heard this before, Canadians. What you don't know is that the last time the Liberal Party made these promises, they were contingent on the provinces providing equal funding. The provinces decided they could not afford to do so. So this time, we will fund these programs ourselves.
I believe that Canada has a noble role in the world as peace-keepers and nation-builders, and I will restore funding and morale to our military so that they can better serve Canada and the world. I believe in a strong Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and I will uphold it. I believe in fiscal responsibilty, and keeping the books balanced. These are things I believe.
Finally, I know it's time for a change in Ottawa. I know that many Canadians feel this just as strongly as I do. I ask you, tonight, to consider our new Liberal Party as the best agent to effect that change.

STEPHEN HARPER, CONSERVATIVES:

Tonight, Canadians, I am under attack.
I'm under attack because I have said in the past that I don't like abortion. I'm under attack because I have expressed discomfort with the idea of same-sex marriage. I'm under attack, and have been since before this election campaign began, for things I believe.
Now, let me make you a promise. I know you don't want to hear about political promises--we've all heard far too many--but I want to make this one anyway, because it means more to me than my views on abortion or marriage for gays and lesbians.
I will uphold democracy.
Do you hear that, Canadians?
I will uphold democracy.
Paul Martin believes that it is his duty as Prime Minister to block any private member's bill that does not reflect 'Canadian' values. (By which he means "Liberal" values.) I won't do that. I see Parliament as the place for healthy debate on policy issues. I do not think that unelected judges should have the power to form social policy in this country.
But I will listen to Canadians and I will respect what I'm hearing. And while I'm doing that, I will work to reform Parliament so that it is more accountable to you, the electorate. I will institute spending controls that have been lacking for years. This will free up money to invest in health care, to replace our decrepit military equipment, and it will also allow modest tax relief for our overtaxed families. Don't think it can't be done. There are billions of dollars available. All it takes is a shifting of priorities.
Let's kill the long-gun registry. For one thing, it's redundant. There's been a gun registry in Canada since the 1930s. For another, we were all told it would cost two million dollars to implement. It's now over a billion dollars and counting. But most importantly, it has not saved one single life. Indeed, gun crime in our major cities is sharply up.
So let's take the money that would have been spent on the wasteful gun registry, and instead use it to hire and train more police officers. Do you know how many constables can be hired for $1 billion? Over ten thousand.
See, that's just one example of where the money's hiding. There are dozens of other places. And if you elect a Conservative government, we promise to do our best to find them. After all, it's your money.
--------------------------------------
And that would be a jumping off point for a real debate.

Just a thought...

No comments: