Toronto Star

THE GLOVES COME OFF

Harper pulls through largely unscathed despite three-to-one tilt against him and weak responses on economy

- Tim Harper

If Tories were looking for material for an attack ad, Trudeau did not give it to them

Stephen Harper knew what was coming.

In this, the first debate of a protracted election campaign, he would have to fend off attacks from three adversarie­s standing literally, but not ideologica­lly, to his right on a Toronto stage Thursday night.

He had to handle the NDP’s Thomas Mulcair, the Opposition leader, who remained calm and expertly picked his spots during the two-hour debate, a Green leader in Elizabeth May who, again, punched above her party’s weight when given the chance, and an eager, energized and at times hyperaggre­ssive Justin Trudeau who performed well, but acted as if he was getting paid by the word.

Throughout, Harper tried to remain cool, but his bid to appear statesmanl­ike often came off as passive.

Harper — the most experience­d debater on the stage — was in the toughest spot, but the bad news for him was that he was weakest when pushed on the economy, another sign that a file that was once his strong suit is gradually eroding as a strong card for a government seeking another term.

For Trudeau, this was a chance to show Canadians he had the gravitas to make this election a true three-way race and he passed, although there was no question he had the advantage of exceedingl­y low expectatio­ns.

If Tories were looking for material for an attack ad, Trudeau did not give it to them and he scored best when he went at Harper for lack of leadership, whether it was refusing to meet with premiers, his inability to get resources to market or calling on the provinces to help him with the Senate “before I appoint again.”

But that doesn’t mean he supplanted Mulcair as the strongest alternativ­e to Harper, even if the NDP leader started proceeding­s slowly.

He surprising­ly pulled his punches on the environmen­t, retreating into the cocoon of “study” when pushed on pipelines (primarily by May, who was in her sweet spot) and did not properly challenge Harper on democratic reform.

But he hit his stride on foreign policy and the anti-terror act, C-51, and was able to clearly make his points as the evening wore on before stumbling in his closing remarks.

Mulcair was still introducin­g himself to many Canadians Thursday night, and there was nothing in the introducti­on to give pause to those who may be looking at him as a potential prime minister.

The Conservati­ve leader tried to reassure Canadians that all was fine with the economy except for an energy sector being battered by matters out of Canadian control.

He rattled off the requisite numbers but it got lost in the din, and Mulcair may have got off the line of the night when he said Harper was the only prime minister who, when asked about the recession, could answer, “which one?”

But some of Harper’s best moments came when passivity worked to his advantage when his opponents wrangled with each other, particular­ly a bizarre interlude when Trudeau and Mulcair fenced over the NDP’s position that Quebec could separate on a vote of 50 per cent plus one.

Mulcair turned to Trudeau and asked for his number, repeatedly badgering him with “What’s your number, Justin? What’s your number?” Trudeau gave him a number — “nine” — as in the number of Supreme Court of Canada justices who sat in judgment of the Clarity Act, but as the two men slagged each other, Harper merely bided his time before accusing Mulcair of “trying to throw gasoline on a fire that’s not burning.”

Mulcair’s position on the Clarity Act is unlikely to become a ballot question in October, but it does play to a perception stoked by Trudeau that the NDP is too cosy with the waning separatist movement in Quebec.

This debate was unique in many ways. It was not televised by the traditiona­l broadcasti­ng consortium and viewership numbers for a midsummer event in a campaign that had not yet taken shape would be expected to be down.

Those who missed the debate missed a freewheeli­ng forum expertly moderated by Maclean’s columnist Paul Wells.

Harper probably did not push back as hard as he could.

But he didn’t exactly emerge battered and, given his vulnerabil­ities over almost a decade, there was a sense that given the three-to-one tilt on that stage, the Conservati­ve leader was breathing fairly easy after this evening.

 ??  ?? ELIZABETH MAY GREEN PARTY “I don’t really think (Harper) has got a good track record on spotting when this country is in a recession.”
ELIZABETH MAY GREEN PARTY “I don’t really think (Harper) has got a good track record on spotting when this country is in a recession.”
 ??  ?? JUSTIN TRUDEAU LIBERAL PARTY “Nine Supreme Court justices said one vote is not enough to break up this country and yet that is Mr. Mulcair’s position.”
JUSTIN TRUDEAU LIBERAL PARTY “Nine Supreme Court justices said one vote is not enough to break up this country and yet that is Mr. Mulcair’s position.”
 ?? PHOTOS BY CP/REUTERS/AFP/GETTY IMAGES ?? THOMAS MULCAIR NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY “Honestly, Mr. Harper, we really can’t afford another four years of you.”
PHOTOS BY CP/REUTERS/AFP/GETTY IMAGES THOMAS MULCAIR NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY “Honestly, Mr. Harper, we really can’t afford another four years of you.”
 ??  ?? STEPHEN HARPER CONSERVATI­VE PARTY “If you are not prepared to call the threat you face by its name, you are not prepared to confront it.”
STEPHEN HARPER CONSERVATI­VE PARTY “If you are not prepared to call the threat you face by its name, you are not prepared to confront it.”
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada